DSS.950117(=#01) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 17 January 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
James Blankenship, recorder (edited RAK)
On the first day of class, various administrative details necessarily
occupied some of our attention. The initial assignment is for students to
read through The Dead Sea Scrolls Today> (by James VanderKam) and
Responses to 101 Questions on the Dead Seas Scrolls> (by Joseph A.
Fitzmyer) as expeditiously as is practicable, then begin a critical
(comparative) review of a third book from the list of works already
circulated (and deposited on the class archive at the ccat gopher). Books
not on that list may also be used with prior approval. The aim is to
achieve a common level of knowledge about the Scrolls and their world
before we begin to focus on reading them as such. Don't hesitate to ask
questions about the material you read, using the email access.
Four types of ancient literature will be most relevant to our discussion
of the DSS (dated roughly from 2d BCE to 1 CE, found 1946-47).
1. *Biblical* works in a restricted sense come to be collected in the
Jewish Scriptures (also known as the Hebrew Bible or TaNaKh, Protestant
Christian "Old Testament") and are very important among the DSS for
various reasons. Depending on who is dating, these works range from at
least 7th BCE to as late as 2d BCE (some may argue that certain Psalms
were added or supplemented even later).
2. The *Apocrypha* (sometimes also called "deuterocanonical" literature)
refers to a collection of materials that came to be included in the "Old
Testament" ("OT") of classical, pre-Protestant Christianity (Roman
Catholic, Eastern Orthodox), but not in Jewish or Protestant Bibles. Most
of the Apocrypha are entire books (e.g. Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, the
Maccabees), but occasionally "additions" to the books of the Jewish
Scriptures also are found among the Apocrypha (e.g. the stories of Susanna
and "Bel and the Dragon" are included with Daniel). Depending on who is
counting, the Apocrypha include approximately 14 books or portions of
books usually dated from the 3d BCE through the period on which we will
focus. The DSS also include fragments of some of these Jewish writings.
3. *Pseudepigrapha* ("falsely attributed writings") vary widely in date and
content, and also are represented among the DSS remains. In general,
pseudepigraphic works are written in the name of (or identified with) a
respected ancient figure (Enoch, Moses, Jeremiah, etc.) which makes the
work appear older and more worthy of respect. This is an open ended
category, unlike the relatively fixed collections of Bible and Apocrypha
described above.
4. If a writing found among the DSS doesn't comfortably fit into one of
these three categories, and seems to reflect the ideas and practices of
the DSS community itself, it may be labeled *Sectarian*. Such works are
often thought to have originated within the community which kept the
scrolls. (Writings that fall into none of the above categories are also
possible, and we should be alert to the arbitrary nature of some of these
classifications.)
Additionally, in looking for materials that help us recreate the world
that produced the DSS, we should be aware of certain works by Josephus and
Philo, among others.
Josephus (about 37 CE to after 100 CE) claims to have been a priest, as
well as a general in the Jewish Rebellion against Rome which lasted from
about 66 CE to 73 CE. (It was during this Rebellion, in 70 CE, that the
Jewish "2d Temple" in Jerusalem was destroyed. 70 CE is therefore a very
important, pivotal date used to determine the date of other events [e.g.,
"did _x_ occur before or after the destruction of the Temple?"].) Josephus
spent his life after the rebellion in Rome under imperial sponsorship. Of
Josephus' works, the following are especially important for us:
1. The Jewish War>, written in the 80s CE. Josephus' most detailed
effort to explain to his readers (Jewish and also Roman) how the rebellion
of his people against Rome came about, and how he came to be a general for
the Romans' opposition before he abandoned the Jewish military cause.
2. Antiquities (or, History) of the Jews>, published around 100 CE.
Josephus' effort to give a history from the beginning of the world down to
his own time. The biblical period is covered in his account, and he
provides information about Jewish history after that, for which we have
few other sources.
3. Against Apion>, also from about 100 CE. Josephus answers attacks
made on Judaism by an opponent, and thus provides another perspective on
Judaism and Jewish practices in the period from which the DSS come.
At least twice, Josephus discusses Jewish subgroups ("sects" in a
non-prejudicial sense); Pharisees, Sadduccees, Essenes, and at one point a
"4th philosophy," usually identified with the "Zealots" (who may or may
not be identical to the "Sicarii" that he also mentions). Josephus claims
to have studied some of these groups as a youth, and in later life he
claims to cultivate a Pharisaic orientation. The DSS are thought by many
to have been produced and collected by Essenes.
Philo was a native Greek speaker (unlike Josephus), and an Alexandrian
Jew. The only firm contemporary date related by Philo in his voluminous
writings is his account of his participation in an Embassy to Gaius>
(the Roman Emperor, Caligula) around 40 CE, in the wake of some
anti-Jewish riots in Alexandria. Many conjecture that Philo lived from
about 20 BCE - 45 CE. (Dr. Kraft is willing to let Philo live into the
60s CE.) Philo does not speak of the Pharisees or the Sadducees, but
speaks very favorably of the Essenes, in terms similar to those in
Josephus.
The Essenes are also mentioned by Pliny the Elder, a non-Jewish Greek
natural historian, geographer, and ethnographer who died in the aftermath
of the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 CE.
Historically and chronologically speaking, this course will most concern
itself with the period from the time of the Jewish Hasmonean (Maccabean)
Rebellion against the Greek Seleukids (in the 160's BCE) to the time of
the Jewish Rebellion against Rome around 70 CE. Geographically, it will
focus on the Syro-Palestinian corridor, but also with an eye on what was
happening in Jewish circles throughout the eastern Mediterranean and the
"fertile crescent."
Next class will include a PBS Video on the DSS.
//end dss.950117//
DSS.950119(=#02) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 19 January 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Brad Kirkegaard, recorder (ed RAK)
Preliminaries: Minutes of the first class session can be found in the
class archive on the ccat gopher. Most class members can access it by
typing "gopher ccat.sas.upenn.edu" from the unix command line. The menus
are pretty self-explanatory thereafter. Note that the list of approved
books for review has also been placed in a separate file. Sometime soon
people should be choosing their books and notifying RAK, who will add
appropriate notations to the file to avoid too much duplication. The
reviews should consist of about two pages (500 words), and should reflect
your knowledge gained from the required reading in VanderKam and Fitzmyer.
These will be due before spring break (beginning of March).
The general plan of attack is for everyone to get the introductory
materials (VanderKam, Fitzmyer, your review book) under their belts
quickly so we can plunge into the primary sources for ourselves, with
some awareness of the issues and problems.
Main translations of primary material (see also the Course Requirements):
Garcia Martinez - represents the most complete translation. The appendix
in the back will make some sense of the different naming systems that have
been employed over the years for the documents (basic system lists cave,
document and specific copy, when relevant; e.g. 1QIsa\a is from cave 1 at
Qumran, the text of Isaiah, copy 1).
Gaster - 2 main values. The first is both good and bad, he doesn't
translate very literally, but with an eye to what he thinks the texts
mean, in the framework of his extensive knowledge of early Judaism and the
ancient world. The second major value of Gaster is that he has an
appendix that is organized topically (e.g. laws, opponents, eschatology,
etc.).
Vermes (pronounced Vermesh) - attempts to be fairly literal and has
achieved wide acceptance; most criticized for not providing line numbers
(essential for working with photographs, etc.). An expanded version
including many of the recently released fragments, and line numbers (thus
comparable in scope and format to Garcia Martinez) is announced for
release in May.
Student Question: Any simple ways to get started in this material
("Reader's Digest version")?
In addition to the secondary literature already mentioned, the Anchor
Bible Dictionary provides a good basic overview as well as references to
other sources (see John J. Collins, "Dead Sea Scrolls"; also J.
Murphy-O'Connor, "Qumran"). The introductions for each of the
aforementioned translations also provide a good starting place. Two other
sources utilizing visual images as well include the film for today (see
below; there are also other films on the subject) and the "Dead Sea
Scrolls Revealed" CD-ROM. The CD-ROM should be available for use in MMETS
(basement of Rittenhouse Lab) some time after Monday. One copy will also
eventually be ready for use in the Van Pelt Library (reference section).
And, fingers crossed, one copy will be up and running in our very own
computer lab in 109-110 Duhring Wing in about two weeks.
A brief bit of history on recent scholarship on the scrolls (for more
details, see VanderKam ch.7 and Fitzmyer, passim [= "here and there"]): Up
until about four years ago, before Hershel Shanks launched his campaign in
the Biblical Archaeology Review magazine (about 1990, with increasing
intensity), access to the material was somewhat limited for some
researchers, largely based on connections and whether one was deemed a
responsible scholar. Then the director of the Huntington library in
southern California discovered that the library had photos of all of the
scrolls and decided to fulfill his role of making information available
by releasing them to the public. This doubtless influenced the newly
formed committee in Jerusalem to hasten the release of the official
photographic archive for public access, and to publish the photos
officially in 1993. The film you are about to see was made in 1991, in
the midst of these developments.
Film - "Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls" (NOVA from the WGBH Collection,
Boston: Films for the Humanities & Sciences, FFH 3000; 60 min., color)
Throughout their history controversy has surrounded the scrolls. In 1946
three Bedouin shepherds were travelling through the area. The youngest in
search of a stray found the first of the Qumran caves.
(Brief description of the texts partly from RAK and partly from film: the
texts date from around 250BCE to 70CE. The fragments of the book of
Exodus from ca. 250BCE represent the oldest preserved biblical text.
Most of the texts are of a somewhat more sectarian nature - who these
people were remains an issue of debate. The texts are written mostly in
Hebrew (some Aramaic and Greek), and mostly on leather, with some papyri
and even one on copper.)
Back to our film story... After finding the scrolls the Bedouin brought
them to Bethlehem to sell to Kando, who was a cobbler (the Bedouin thought
the leather would have some value for making straps for shoes, etc.) but
also sometimes dealt in antiquities. Some of these documents were then
purchased by the Metropolitan (a high church office) Samuel, who thought
they might be very old documents in Syriac. Three more texts, still in
Bethlehem, were bought by Sukenik, and Israeli scholar. Samuel, having
realized something of the value of his property, took it to America where
it received great acclaim. However, after 5 yrs. he was still unable to
sell it for his asking price of 1 million dollars. He then advertised it
in the Wall Street Journal, where it was seen and purchased through a
complex string on negotiations by a visiting Israeli scholar, Yigael
Yadin, for $250,000. The Shrine of the Book Museum was then built in
Jerusalem to house the documents.
In 1952 a second cave was found by the Bedouin. The archaeological
community, partly not wanting to pay the Bedouin, and partly thinking they
might hit pay dirt went on to dig some 275 caves - only one of which, cave
3, resulted in significant finds. The Bedouin, on the other hand, hit pay
dirt again with cave 4. Their large number of fragmentary documents were
then bought by the Jordanians for the Palestine Museum (subsequently
renamed the Rockefeller Museum). The project of deciphering them was
under Jordanian control, and no Jews were includeded on the team - the
seeds for future conflicts.
The story now jumps to John Strugnell and the scholars who painstakingly
tried to reassemble the documents. The canonical texts were separated off
and the fragments arranged. The non-canonical material, however, was not
particularly easy to reassemble. This elaborate jigsaw puzzle was pieced
together primarily by handwriting of the scribes, shapes of fragments, and
and other physical characteristics of the different scraps.
Qumran. This site, some 14(?) miles East of Jerusalem, was originally
thought to be a Roman garrison. Popular opinion now sets it as the home
of a sectarian Jewish community known as the Essenes (though scholarly
opinion continues to have dissenting views). The Essenes were a monastic
group who left Jerusalem in protest to establish a purified community and
await the end times. They were destroyed in 68 CE by the Romans, in
connection with the "first Jewish revolt" against Rome.
Excavation at Qumran began in the early 1950s under the direction of the
eccentric figure of Roland de Vaux. He was struck by parallels to a
monastic community. More particularly he felt that the discoveries fit
well with the type of community described in the scrolls (room where they
might have been written - ink wells, etc., possible dining hall and pantry
- large number of pots, grave site with majority of male remains.)
[Time ran out: the Film will be concluded next class.]
/end minutes dss.950119/
DSS.950124(=#03) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls class, 24 January 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Glen Aduana & Clare Bayard, recorders [PESHER by RAK = B*B]
[Clarification requests to cbayard@sas.upenn.edu (firebrat)]
[pre-PESHER: It is recorded on the heavenly tablets that the council of
the gods (see Psalm 82.1) has often debated creaturely "free will" --
whether to permit the illusion or not. Beliar's excesses required
suppression (note Genesis 6.1-4). Nevertheless, to promote a more
congenial public image in contrast to that insinuated by the speakers of
smooth things, the council has mandated occasional "lapses," especially to
avoid damaging or dampening the inspired spirit of promising young
children of light. Thus it happens that the following record has been
inscribed by the finger of the most ancient, not as an example for
emulation but as a monument to righteous instructive irreverence. It has
been decreed to be the lot of the Watcher B*B(TM Microsoft) to oversee
such matters in his role of earthly apocalyptic liaison.]
PSUEDEPIGRAPHA FRAGMENT #225
(attributed to Pliny the Youngest and Esdras the Fourth)
And so upon the 24th day of the first month of the one thousand, nine
hundred and ninety-fifth year of our [tetragrammaton], Bob did call into
existence the Dead Sea Scrolls Class #3 from random matter at one hour and
thirty-one minutes past noon. And a tenth of those he summoned were lifted
to the knife -- "Thou shalt not address questions to Me over the Net which
thou couldst have solved thyself," He thundered, and the rivers and the
High Rises ran red with blood. [PESHER: check the sources at your elbow
before crying out for a hand.] Those saved through the covenant born from
His mercy were spared, and assembled in the tiny cubicle, there to be
educated by the Bob revealer Himself. Bob encouraged His children to suck
from the Tree of Knowledge that is VanderKam and Fitzmyer. Bob spake
kindly unto His children, saying "Get thee to the gopher, and there wilt
thou find those tomes which are yet ripe for thy criticism, having not
been claimed by other members of the community." [PESHER (poetic genre):
Sign up for the required review, / one to a book or possibly two.]
At 1:37 by the hourglass, Bob likened the labor of minute-taking to "The
Dating Game," and proceeded to attempt pairing among his children. He took
Chanan, whose name he had only just created, from Karen's rib, for she
needed a companion for the sixteenth of February. [PESHER: The assignments
for minute-taking were appropriately expanded; check the gopher.] He
encouraged His children to glean knowledge from Fitzmyer's well-organized
tome The Dead Sea Scrolls: Major Publications and Tools for Study>
(Scholars Press 1990). The children were shown a glossy panorama
photographic print of a conference in bygone years portraying several
handlers of the Scrolls, which for their continuing joy, Bob has scanned
onto His Heavenly Homepage.
As the minute of 1:42 became, Bob drew forth a discussion concerning the
variously designated Damascus Document/Covenant/Rule, Zadokite
Fragment(s), or simply CD or CDC (Cairo Damascus Covenant, or similarly)
by reading from its opening lines. This Document, of which fragments have
now appeared at Qumran, was first found nearly a century past, in a Cairo
synagogue's forgotten geniza. A geniza, literally "treasury," is a
sanctified collecting place for revered materials requiring special ritual
disposal. This synagogue, built upon the site which its tradition claimed
as the landing-place for the basket of baby Moses, had been a Karaite
Jewish locale. Around the year 800 CE, Christian leaders reported the
discovery of scrolls in a cave in the area of Jerusalem. The Karaites were
emerging at this time, and may have had access to such cave discoveries as
well. The recognition of older writings may have fueled their atavistic
opposition to traditionalist rabbis. Bob, in His omniscience, drew a
parallel between the Karaites and Christianity's Protestants with
reference to the desire to recapture the pristine past. Karaites today
survive in small number. One community is imagined in Los Angeles, in the
200s block of Sunset Boulevard, maybe others in Egypt and Turkey, and at
least one in Jerusalem. It is rumored that Elvis is among them.
The CDC document refers to its authors as the "sons of Zadok," hence the
name "Zadokite Fragment(s)." The priesthood of Zadok was caught up in the
internal struggles of Judaism over who holds legitimate authority. Much of
the polemical tone that appears in many of the DSS is already found in the
Damascus Document in the earliest recoverable phase of the history of that
group, where the group is identified with "Damascus." Bob pronounced that
insofar as claims of legitimacy for community leadership and related
matters go, timing, support and location are often more important than
presumed "legal" legitimacy. [PESHER: A bird in the hand finds it easier
to fly. Might makes history. Possession is the better part of valor.]
The Damascus Document assumes a division of outlook or activity. It refers
to a group of people named Israel and a sanctuary. The people are punished
for their unfaithfulness, but then God remembers the covenant, and a
"remnant" of Israel is saved. The "prophetic" passage in Jeremiah
31.31-34 is recalled, although Sigrid suggested that Bob's children read
the whole context. The idea of "the LORD" making a "new covenant" agreement
is prevalent in the DSS. Bob warned the cowering RELS225ites that the
modern notion of a prophet as predicter is simplistic; a prophet in
ancient Israel is basically one who speaks forth, warns, cajoles,
condemns, calls to repent. "The prophet is the conscience of the people!"
saith Bob.
The reference to "the LORD" in the Jeremiah passage became a burning thorn
in the side of the collective class. The Hebrew text contains the
"tetragrammaton" --"the four-letter word for God's special name." To avoid
profaning the name, special devices were developed, such as substituting
the general term "Lord" (Adonai) when the text contains the
tetragrammaton. In some English Bible translations, "LORD" represents the
tetragrammaton, as distinct from "Lord" for other terms that convey that
meaning. Some moderns have attempted to represent the supposed
pronunciation of the tetragrammaton (YHWH) by vocalizing the Hebrew as
"Jehovah" (taking the vowels from Adonai/Edonai) or "Yahweh" (more common
in scholarly circles). A Greek DSS fragment even represents the
tetragrammaton with the Greek IAO (or JAO). In generations of copying the
scripts, scribes have tried to preserve the sanctity of the
tetragrammaton. Paleo-Hebrew has even been used in DSS "normal" Hebrew MSS
(= manuscripts) to represent the sacred name. These practices all seem to
be motivated by the commandment not to take the name "in vain" (Exodus
20.7 // Deuteronomy 5.11), especially by building a protective "fence"
that prohibits speaking or profanely writing it. On the bathroom humor
side (pardon us, B*B), some Greek scribes tackled the problem of
pronouncing the name by transliterating the tetragrammaton as
though it were Greek letters "pi-iota-pi-iota," or "pipi."
Regarding the aquisition of general knowledge relevant to the course, Bob
hurled a twin thunderbolt to the table around which His children were
gathered. When this thunderbolt dissipated, remaining on the table were
Bob's endorsement of two reference books on Judaism. These were the Jewish
Encyclopedia, which is almost a century old, and was written with much
involvement from reform Jewish scholars; and the Encyclopedia Judaica,
written in the 1970s with participation from Israeli scholars clothed in
leisure suits of sackcloth.
Dating, not in relation to pairing students for minutes, but to estimating
approximate ages of documents like the DSS and CDC, has been estimated
especially through radiocarbon dating and paleography, or the study of
ancient handwriting. Paleography has a margin of error of about three
generations, and is extremely important for the DSS and like documents.
The CDC material discovered in the Old Cairo synagogue is dated relatively
late, paleographically, and thus must in fact be a copy of something
earlier, since the DSS fragments are centuries earlier, although how many
generations of copies it has gone through cannot be deduced.
4QMMT, or "Some of the Deeds of the Torah," may be close to being an
original (if it is a foundation document of the DSS group) although the
preserved fragments come from more than one copy. Many Egyptian papyri are
non-literary original documents and thus are unique.
As the Heavenly Clock reached 2:34, Bob ignited the television screen, and
the supplicants viewed the remainder of the NOVA special on the DSS. The
sad demise of Strugnell was chronicled, and the children wept. A new
proposal was introduced with a Brooklyn accent from a black beard: perhaps
the writers of the DSS were Sadducees, and not Essenes, and therefore from
the mainstream of Judaism. The video continued with a challenge to the
opinion that the buildings at Qumran had anything to do with the people
who left the scrolls, and concluded with such Revelations as "Who wrote
the DSS? The evidence is not conclusive."
Six minutes before the hour, and thus four minutes overtime, Bob banished
his children into the flurries commencing on the dirty street behind the
Wingdom of Duhring.
[post-PESHER: This is NOT a contest; no wagering allowed; do NOT attempt
to do this in your homes! (Letterman ala B*B, with Fear and Trembling)]
//end of dss.950124//
DSS.950126(=#04) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 26 January 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Adam Schaffer, recorder, Allison Stewart, contributing correspondent
PESHER: As much as I was tempted to follow Clare and Glen's lead
and write the minutes as a haiku, a 100+ degree fever has
stifled my creative impulses for the time being. My
humblest apologies :-) Adam
I. Administrivia
A. Names
- Name tags are passed out. YAY!. Now we are all one
happy DSS family. Remember to bring your name tag to
subsequent classes.
- Allison Stewart is entitled to the front seat in the
classroom because she has 2 l's in her first name.
[Actually front left, where Gabriel would stand,
or where the goats get separated off from the sheep?]
B. Random stuff
- Class examines pieces of papyrus, a plant cut into thin
strips on which people wrote many scrolls including
the DSS. Pieces are of modern manufacture.
- Class examines some grains of sand which are allegedly
from Qumran. The vial of sand comes with the CD-ROM on
the DSS. (PESHER: watch for the upcoming Oliver Stone
movie that reveals how vials like this are all part of
a conspiracy by the US government to cover up secret
military maneuvers in Israel during the Vietnam War).
C. Announcements
- Speaking of the CD-ROM, there are some problems with it
at the moment. The sound is not working on the moving parts
(the quick-time). It will be fixed shortly. Stay tuned
for later developments.
- The minutes list is now on the gopher. Class minutes will be
provided individually, and as a compilation (for more
convenient searching).
- The film which the class saw 1/19 and 1/24 is now back
at MMETS in DRL. It can be viewed there, but it cannot
be checked out without special arrangements.
- All books have been ordered and/or re-ordered (except
the Vermes, the popular translation for the past fifteen years,
which is currently in stock).
- Remember, the Gaster book can be quite helpful because
it is a more interpretative (rather than literal) translation.
- If you don't see a book in the text department, check
the trade section at the front of the bookstore (likely
to be under religious studies, not Jewish studies), or check
another bookstore.
- Signups for book reviews are now on the gopher.
- A course on the DSS is being taught at Clemson Universtity
by Dr. Leonard Greenspoon. We may have a video
conference with them and/or joint projects.
- The IOUDAIOS list is out there for our e-mail
enjoyment. It is an academic discussion group for
people who are interested in Judaism from the
Greco-Roman period. Right now, these people are quite
interested in the DSS. Many of them will join us on
our list, and they will be able to help us with
questions that might not be appropriate for our list
(i.e. questions about the Karaites).
To join, send this message to listserv@lehigh.edu
subscribe ioudaios-l [insert your name here].
- IRC (computer) questions, refer them to Dr. Bob.
D. Kudos to Dan Werlin
- He is the only one done with VanderKam
- He was right about the etymology of the Hebrew word
"Ganaz" (which in Hebrew is spelled Gimel, Nun, Zayin),
It does indeed mean, "to hide," and hence our word
"Genizah," for the place where things are hidden/stored.
II. Serious (though rarely connected) matters
A. Papyrus
- Chiefly a product of Egypt (exported especially from Alexandria).
- Relatively cheap and durable, thus widely used and a boon to
"literacy" and to the preservation of records.
- Comes in a variety of qualities. Some is rough and relatively
thick, almost like tree bark, while most is smoothed and
treated to be more appropriate for use in writing.
- In many ways, use of papyrus was a revolution in ancient
writing as a light and transportable alternative to other
options such as leather, clay, or stone.
- All graduate students receive their honorary piece of
papyrus (as does Irv, who as a senior auditor is deemed to be
an honorary graduate student).
- The vial of Qumranian sand will be auctioned off as a
prize for undergrads. Bidding begins at $1.00.
B. Karaites
- Because the Karaites wanted to cut through the rabbinic
Judaism of the period in which they lived in order to
get back to Biblical Judaism, they became very
important critics on Biblical literature.
- However, they don't get much credit for their work since
their extreme minority status made it difficult for
them to get recognition for their acheivements in later
centuries.
- As for the status of the Karaite synagogue in which the
Cairo Genizah was found, Dr. Bob has not yet had the
chance to fully investigate the matter beyond noting that there
also seem to have been synagogues identified with Jerusalem and
with Babylon in Old Cairo (Fustat). More later.
C. Class dismissed -- OOPS! False alarm (Oh well).
D. Canon, Bible, Scriptures
- Preface: Because study of the scriptures is so important to the
study of Judaism (and its Christian offshoot), it is especially
important that you ask questions to clarify matters for yourselves.
- Preface #2: Don't make assumptions about "the Bible" at Qumran
based on what you think you know about the Bible today.
It is important that we give the Qumranites the opportunity
to tell (or show) us how they viewed their "scriptural"
(authoritative) books, to the extent that is possible.
- Term "Canon" comes from the Greek word meaning
"measuring stick" (we also get our word "cane" from
the same root).
- Accordingly, the word has come to designate a set of
authoritative books by which a people defines itself
(or in terms of which it measures itself) -- it can also be
used in other similar associations, such as "canon law."
- Inherent in the term "canon" is the idea of authority.
- Jewish communities in Qumranic times may not have had a
single definitive canonical collection. The various
scriptural collections doubtless had some common elements,
but they don't seem to have been identical.
E. The DSS, Scrolls, Canon, and Codices
- Scrolls and codices were two ways of "packaging" written
material.
- A scroll is a long piece of writing material rolled horizontally
(normally), with the writing in columns.
- A codex (plural codices) is a book bound much like we
know it today. Modern codices are composed of several
"quires," each in itself a mini-codex of standard size,
sewn or glued together on one edge. Writing, then,
can be found consecutively on both sides of each page
and access to any location in the codex is easy, compared
to the situation with normal rolls.
- Codices, however, did not really come into widespread use
until around 100-200 CE, and the reasons for this technological
development are not entirely clear (one theory is that
Christians led the way). Large-scale codices capable of holding
the entire Christian Bible are not known until the 4th century.
- We do, however, have codices from as far back as the
first century CE (though only small scale, single quire).
- The first codices may have been derived from thin wooden tablets
coated with wax, used in school exercises, for example.
- The DSS, however, predate that time period (otherwise
they'd be called the Dead Sea Codices :-) ).
- In terms of dealing with canon, one must recognize that
it is much more difficult to have a common biblical canon when
one is using scrolls. The reason is that a scroll, by
virtue of how cumbersome it was, could only have a
limited amount of material on it. Accordingly, a canonical
collection (like "the Bible") would have to be comprised
of many separate scrolls, each of which contained
"scriptural" (authoritative) material. What was included, or
excluded, in one's "canon" would be determined by some external
means such as a list of authoritative works or perhaps a
cabinet with several compartments.
- We do not know whether the DSS community were committed to
one singular canon. We know, for example, that
Josephus gave a list of books respected by *his*
Jews, but who knows how many other communities were like
Josephus'. It is clear that the DSS people were in conflict
with some other Jewish group(s) of their time, although we
cannot be sure that "canon" was an issue.
- Large-scale codices allowed one compiler to collect under a single
cover all the works considered canonical. This makes it much
easier to think in terms of "the Bible" as a closed unit.
III. Final random (and completely unconnected) babblings
A. Qumran and the caves
- Various hypotheses have been offered concerning the connection
between the DSS caves and the Qumran community. The
DeVaux hypothesis states that the two were definitely
linked, although there is no incontrovertable evidence to back
this up, such as scraps of scrolls found at the excavation
site at Qumran (next to the ink wells).
- There are good reasons to question the recent hypothesis by the
Donceels that argues that the Qumran community was a villa
of wealth/luxury (from the end of the video) -- Jodi Magness (a
Penn PhD) reported on the dissimilarities between Qumran and
other known villa sites at a recent scholarly conference.
- We do know, however, that the DSS group liked to "check
out" those who wanted to become members of the
community. This "screening" was accomplished by means of
strict rites of initiation, as described in the "sectarian"
literature from the DSS.
- On the whole, we cannot assume that everything found in
the caves was considered authoritative, but we do know that
those scrolls which contain commentary on (or quote "proofs"
from) other writings are important not only because such
scrolls contain writing from the Qumran era, but
because they show us which sources were important to
the Qumranian people (the logic being that a piece that
merited commentary clearly had some authority and
importance to the person writing the commentary).
B. Other random thoughts (answers to questions, etc.)
- The "King James version" of the Bible is a favorite translation for
traditional Protestants and its OT is virtually identical to the
traditional Jewish Bible, differing only in order and minor
wording. The early Protestants, assuming that the Jewish
Bible of their day was as close as they could come to the
Bible used in the time of Jesus (as distinct from the Roman
Catholic "Old Testament," with its added "Apocrypha"),
accepted as canonical only the shorter collection. Thus from
the time of Luther (ca. 1520 CE) onward, the Protestant OT has
corresponded to the Jewish Bible. The same New Testament (NT)
collection is present in all Christian Bibles of the main
branches (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant).
- Dr. Bob will use the term "scriptures" when referring to
canonical literature (i.e. the "Jewish Scriptures" when
referring to the Old Testament/Jewish Bible). He feels
that such a term captures the spirit of the plurality
of this anthology, among other things.
- 4QMMT deals with Halakic issues -- "Halakic" means
pertaining to "halakah," the Jewish law derived from
the written and oral Torah in classical/rabbinic Judaism.
The word "halakah" comes from the Hebrew verb "to walk,"
thus it concerns "the way in which one should walk"
(i.e. in the way of God's law).
- The writers of documents that dealt with halakah often
felt that the people for (or about) whom they were writing
were doing something wrong and needed written guidance to
set them back on the right track (one must remember
that the ideas of right and wrong were very much
subject to the interpretation of the authors and/or their
communities).
C. Gnostic gospels (a less-connected question)
- "Gnostics" refers to people who felt that they had a special
connection to the true and ultimate God, who is different from
the (Jewish) creator God. These people are condemned as
"heretics" by emerging mainstream Christianity and accused of
having strange initiation rites into their esoteric societies
(sometimes compared to the DSS people), among other things.
- Gnostics are usually described as "dualistic," dividing the world
into two aspects: the physical or material (viewed as bad),
and the mental/spiritual (which is good, and true reality);
their outlook resembles that of Plato at this point.
- The "gospels" produced by these people are writings
that try to explain, for example, how Jesus is a
redeemer sent from the ultimate God to awaken the imprisoned
souls/spirits/minds.
//enough! end dss.950126//
DSS.950131(=#05) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 31 January 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
David Slarskey, recorder; Nagin Kormi, quality control
[Here's the minutes. No subliminal messages. No jokes. Nothing
extraordinary. Just good old-fashioned notetaking. Don't look for
anything to amuse you, because you ain't gonna find it in here. DS]
I. Pre-Class stuff
Dr. Kraft updated the class on the subjects of posting minutes, the
Clemson thaang, a lecture on 9 Feb. at Lehigh by Sidnie White Crawford
(whose name you will encounter in the bibliographies) on the Canon at
Qumran, a new article in Bible Review (Feb '95) entitled "Tracing the
Evolution of the Hebrew Bible; What the Dead Sea Scrolls Teach Us" written
by some famous Dutch guy [Adam S. van der Woude], and responded to a
question about the value of Norman Golb's new book (see the list of books
for review).
-Minutes will be posted to our class archive on the ccat.sas gopher
both individually (class by class) and collectively (one growing file) to
make it easy to find a particular date or search the entire body for a
particular topic.
-There's nothing new to report about the Clemson cooperation thing.
-For articles in Bible Review (BR) or Biblical Archaeology Review
(BAR) and similar new materials or materials of general interest (some by
Dutch guys, some not), a shelf will be set up in the Religious Studies
graduate student lounge on the 4th floor of Duhring Wing (414 Duhring). If
the lounge is locked, request access from the main RelSt office (415).
-Norman Golb's book will be especially valuable to those interested in
the question of the connection of the scrolls to the Qumran ruins, and
alternative theories and discussions, but Dr. B*B did not suggest that it
be required (or necessarily even recommended) reading at this introductory
stage of the course [see VanderKam pp.95f for a discussion of some of
Golb's earlier ideas]. Though some have disagreed with de Vaux's theory
that Qumran was a radical religious community that produced the scrolls,
suggesting instead that it may have been a military post, resort area, or
the first all-night Mini Mart, Dr. Kraft doesn't seem to want to get
distracted by these problems at this point [they will be fair game at a
later stage!]. Irv has some articles from the Jerusalem Post that also
may be of some interest to those who are most interested in Golb's point
of view.
Lance Laughed.
II. Class Stuff
Here Dr. Kraft attempted to continue the discussion of the written
"scriptural" materials important to the classical Jewish tradition, the
different Jewish "sects," and the general question of "authority" in early
Judaism, but he was [happily!] kept from his goal by numerous questions.
Here goes.
First, Dr. K. reminded us again that when studying the scriptures of the
period to cast away [or "bracket"] our pre-conceived notions about
"Bible." We should be careful not to read the "canonized" Bible that we
have today, and associated ideas about its meaning and authority, back
into the heads of the DSS authors/transcribers. They certainly attached
authority to various "scriptural" writings, both individually, and in some
relation to each other, but not necessarily as a concrete collective whole
as we have come to do with our ideas of "the Bible."
For those of you to follow,
Dr. K. reminded us here
Not to indent minutes [since
it makes it very difficult to edit them].
There was a question here about why Dr. K. prefers to use the term
"scriptures" instead of "Bible" in reference to the writings and attitudes
of the period. Dr. K. graciously entertained the question, though it had
been answered a bezillion times before in previous classes (no offense to
whoever asked it, just my own personal bias). Basically, there was no
formally "canonized Bible" in the later sense, so we refer to the
scriptures as works which stand on their own merit, not the merit of that
to which they belong. Before long, we were discussing the Pentateuch.
The Pentateuch (also known as the Five Books of Moses, Torah, and the
Greek Septuagint = LXX, strictly speaking) is comprised of the first five
books of Jewish scriptures, Genesis-Deuteronomy. The name Septuagint
comes from an old Greek tradition that 70 (thus "LXX" -- but actually 72
as Lance pointed out) translators translated (different stories came up)
the Pentateuch into Greek for the library in Alexandria in the 3rd century
BCE. For more information on the Septuagint, look it up in VanderKam (pp.
123ff). Plagarism was considered a miracle in ancient Greece [with
reference to the tradition that all the translations produced by the
segregated translators agreed]. Spell "septuagint" like this:
s-e-p-t-u-a-g-i-n-t. *Note: when Dr. K. uses the term septuagint, he
means the pentateuch. When he wishes to refer to the larger collection of
Jewish Greek scriptures (including Prophets, Psalms, Apocrypha, etc.) he
uses "LXX/OG" ("Old Greek" translations). More generally, be aware that
the terms we choose to use are of basic importance for defining and
discussing such things as the community or communities revealed in the
scrolls, as evidenced by the different names even *they* gave themselves
(i.e. sons of Zadok, brotherhood, community, remnant, etc.), but also
what we decide to call them (e.g. "sectarians"!).
Dr. K. here made the observation that there is a surprising lack of
Pentateuch commentary (Pesher) from the Qumran fragments. (Pesher being
the commentary format in which the author distinguishes the text from its
meaning). It was pointed out (by Tal) that there are fragments of a
Genesis pesher although for some reason Garcia Martinez has it in a
separate section from the main grouping of "Pesharim." Here Dr. K. also
described how we have "para-biblical" works, works which may be earlier
than our accepted biblical versions or later than them, but in any case
bear remarkable resemblence to the biblical text while telling the
stories, etc., in noticeably different ways. One such example is the
"Genesis Apocryphon" from cave 1.
An explanation of the term "exegesis" followed in which Dr. K.
distinguished between the idea of deriving meaning out of a text
(exegesis) and reading things into a text (eisegesis). Both are common
ways of interpreting text and depend on assumptions about how to determine
"correct" meanings ("hermeneutics" is a fancy word for approaches to
interpretation). It was asked if the Q. community had principles for
exegesis, as the later Rabbinic Jews did, but Dr.
K. was unaware of any firm evidence of such at Qumran, in the same sense
as those formally associated later with Hillel (the "middot").
(Here there was a superfluous conversation about swimming and diving.
Insert at own risk.)
It was next asked why the Q.ites felt that they were the ones living in
the "final days" (the question of eschatological orientation). After a
long explanation and references to Habakkuk 1:5 in the Qumran pesher, it
became clear that they presupposed the relevence of scriptures to their
times, as many others before them had (any many did after, including Dr.
K's mother). It doesn't matter that everyone else thought they were
living in the final days, when the Q. scholars (or any scholars of the
time period, this was not a unique belief to Q.) read the scriptures they
believed that they were directly related to their own lives.
(Here there was a bit of text criticism discussion, whether the
"nations" of Hab 1.5 should be "traitors" or perhaps a piece of
clothing. [Dr. K. said the class as a whole is not yet ready for such
exercises!])
Dr. K. made allusion to the "Masoretic Text" (= MT; see VanderKam 123)
which would later become formalized as the classical Jewish Bible. This
represents the textual work of the Masoretes (many of which were Karaites)
who were concerned with standardizing the texts in the "middle ages."
(There were some interesting observations about the relationship of the
collections of Josephus and Philo to the discussion of scriptures and of
the DSS people.)
Next question, asked with admittedly "ulterior motive" by our
favorite swimmer, Hunter: "What was the New Covenant in the OT?" Dr. K.
again referred to the passage in Jeremiah 31.31 which promises the "new
covenant that *tetragrammaton* will make with his people in the final
days." This is not a Christian idea -- the concept of a new covenant has
firm roots in Judaism.
III. Random Thoughts
-Next time we will examine the designation "the Teacher of
Righteousness" and its implications for understanding inner Jewish
dynamics in the period.
-Pay close attention to the characteristics of the Sadducees and the
Pharisees in VanderKam, and the ancient sources for such information. It
will be important next class.
-"Kittim" (see pesher Habakkuk) seems to refer to the Romans.
-"Targum" (literally "interpretation/translation") usually refers to an
Aramaic translation of Hebrew scripture (often obviously interpretive in
the translation). There are Targums on Leviticus and Job from Qumran.
The LXX is sometimes called a "Greek Targum."
-The Temple Scroll contains halakic material about the Temple.
-Next Class: early Jewish groups and authority structures.
//end dss.950131//
DSS.950202(=#06) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 2 February 1995
Lisa Bronowitz, recorder; Cara Weinstein, editorial consultant.
The class began with a statement of a problem with the sending of the
minutes to the final editor (RAK): if the minutes are forwarded between
the partners and then to RAK, every line might be preceded by symbols that
impede further editing (e.g. a greater-than sign and an indentation).
Several suggestions were put forward on how to cope with the situation:
(1) save the minutes to a file (e.g. dss.min6) and import them from the
file to a mail message; (2) type f to forward the minutes within ELM, and
then to edit them before sending them; (3) change ELM options accordingly.
After people reinstalled their name tags, someone asked how to print
e-mail. You can upload from the net to your own disk. You can also go to
the unix prompt and type "cat [filename]", and you can download using
modem software and ascii format. On some systems, printing directly from
the incoming mail file (or printing the screen) is also possible.
The 1984 Allegro book, DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND THE CHRISTIAN MYTH, is
usable for the purpose of the book evaluation. Be sure to get your bid
in SOON for a review book. The reviews are due before spring break.
If you're ambitious, perhaps the most thorough introduction to the Dead
Sea Scrolls was written by Miller Burrows, a Yale professor, in two
volumes (1955 and 1957). It is very long, and has lots of discussion of
various theories proposed when the DSS first came to light, and there is
very little which you won't find in there. If you look for it in the Penn
library, remember that since you are looking for a book from the fifties,
you should check the card catalog if it isn't on the computer (the
electronic catalogue is not complete for pre-1970 materials). One of the
best-kept secrets in Van Pelt Library is in the back of the card catalog
section. The Yarnall card catalog is a small but high quality collection
which had to be left in Philadelphia when the Episcopalian Seminary here
merged with the seminary in Cambridge MA. They had to leave part of their
library, so the university agreed to house it. It includes many texts and
translations, and these resources are able to circulate.
An admonition: As you work your way into this subject matter, make a
distinction between the Dead Sea scrolls people (writers, copyists,
readers) and the Qumran (near Ain Feshka) site. The former concerns the
evidence from the caves and the latter is the evidence from the ruins.
They may not necessarily correspond at all (or any) points -- this is an
issue for discussion.
Important Jewish groups of the general era and area (see especially
Josephus War 2.8 and Antiquities 18.1, for the first four):
Sadducees (p. 93 of Vanderkam in the context of who wrote the Dead Sea
Scrolls);
Pharisees (see VanderKam and Fitzmyer indices, esp. Fitzmyer 93ff);
Essenes (we will discuss them ad nauseum);
Zealots and/or Sicarii (a debated category);
Nazarenes [Christians, Messianists] (you will see different spellings);
Therapeutae: A "monastic" order described by Philo. They lived in Egypt
by the Mariotic lake, which is located southwest of Alexandria. Since
Philo's description of this group coincided with his idea of an ideal
community, there is some debate as to whether or not the group was his
fictitious invention. Also, some scholars argue that the Therapeutae
were a Greek-speaking sister community to the Semitic Essenes.
Samaritans: Described by Josephus, but not as a subgroup of the Jews;
Elephantine: The remains of a Jewish temple at this site were found on an
island in the Nile. These remains date from the sixth to fifth century
BCE. We know about the site because archaeologists found papyrii there
written in a Semitic dialect and addressing Jewish affairs.
The Dead Sea Scroll People (if not identical with Essenes);
Boethians: Were mentioned in the New Testament.
We also discussed Heliopolis (also called Leontopolis, perhaps wrongly), a
place in the northeast area of modern Cairo. The City of the Sun figures
in the Moses and Joseph stories. Joseph is said to have married the
daughter of the priest of Heliopolis. Josephus wrote about this site in
168 or 165 BCE. This was the time of the Hasmonean or Maccabean revolt.
Antiochus IV (Antiochus Epiphanes) was the Seleucid ruler at the time. He
wanted unity in his realm, but there were spots of resistance, including
Jerusalem. Antiochus intended to use the Temple as a place of worship of
"the" god which was called by different names by different peoples. In
this way, the Temple would be a site of acquiescence to his rule and a
source of good "P.R." for his power. Antiochus tried to negotiate with
Jewish leaders (especially the priestly elite), but not all of them would
cooperate. Onias IV, a Jewish leader of the line of the high priest, took
some followers and went into Egypt to get permission from the Ptolemaic
king to build a temple in exile in Heliopolis. The temple existed and
functioned until it was closed by the Romans in the wake of the First
Jewish Revolt (see Josephus War 7.10).
"Syncretism" -- the gathering of elements and ideas from other
cultures/religions and using them as part of your group's
ideology/identity. Almost all religions or cultural groupings, including
Judaism, are syncretistic in some sense -- "pure" Judaism, for example,
can't be found historically, since it has been incorporating aspects of
other cultures from the very first.
A caveat about terminology: The "Temple" (Jewish) normally refers to the
priestly temple in Jerusalem; other Jewish gatherings and gathering places
are usually called "synagogues", from the Greek term meaning meeting of
people. The moral: To cut down on confusion, be specific. The
characteristic that makes a temple a temple is the presence of the
priestly rites ("cult").
Notes about historical characters: Onias III and IV were of the highest
priestly line (also the line of Jason, who built a gymnasium in Jerusalem
for education in the Greek style, and his rival Menelaus -- see
2 Maccabees 4).
Zadok, sons thereof -- some think that the Sadducees took their name from
the Zadokites; note the importance of this name in the Damascus Document.
Samaritans: Were they looked down upon? They lived to the north of
Jerusalem, in Samaria. The Samaritans had a temple on a hilly area, which
was called Gerizim in ancient times. They were an offshoot of the outlook
of "Ancient Israel" that forms the backdrop of what we have come to call
"Judaism." From some perspectives (e.g. Romans living in Rome), the
Samaritans were were similar enough to the Jews that they were probably
lumped together (Josephus even suggests that on occasion, Samaritans
called themselves Jews).
The two ancient kingdoms behind this all: In 931-921 BCE (in the wake of
King Solomon's death), there was a rebellion amongst his heirs and
successors. The country was split into two kingdoms: Israel in the north
and Judah in the south. The designation "Jew" derives from the southern
kingdom of "Judah," with Jerusalem as its capital.
//end dss.950202//
DSS.950207(=#07) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 7 February 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Allison Stewart, ultimately responsible; Adam Schaffer, shadow
I. Preliminary Rhetoric (Miscellaneous):
A. The DSS Revealed CD-ROM
- The CD-ROM on the Dead Sea Scrolls is now up and working in room 413
of the Duhring Wing. This room can be accessed by request only. Send
all money to Dr. Robert Kraft, room 409, Duhring Wing, please, no IOUs.
- The CD includes a large glossary of terms and names, and there are a
few typos and such. This is probably due to the fact that the CD was put
together quite hastily so as to get on the market as soon as possible.
The CD was put together in Great Britain and was sanctioned by the Israel
Antiquities Authority.
- This CD is also at MMETS (DRL basement), but the sound track on the
video clips is not working there yet; otherwise, for the main bodies of
material the MMETS setup is fine. There is also a copy at Van Pelt
(but no adequate computer). The idea of circulating the CDs was brought
up so that those who possess computers capable of running the CDs (having
double speed CD-ROM drives and sound cards) could outshine the rest of us.
B. Etc.
- Dr. Kraft (the almighty) circulated a new catalogue from Dove
Booksellers which conveniently lists recent books and resources on the
Dead Sea Scrolls.
- The Garcia-Martinez book is still not in the bookstore, but the
bookstore hasn't given up yet.
- There is a possibility of our class having another guest lecturer.
Dr. Kraft would very much like Dr. Ross Kraemer to come to lecture us on
the Therapeutae, a subject that she dealt with in her doctoral thesis and
has continued to pursue in more recent publications. [16 February]
II. Relevant Rhetoric:
- In our last class, we began the discussion of sects of Judaism
pertinent to our discussion of the Dead Sea Scrolls. This included
tangents covering the group at Elephantine and at Heliopolis
(Leontopolis). In today's class, we again turned our attention to groups
relevant to our discussion of the scrolls, specifically to groups with
some sort of eschatological bent or high eschatological expectations, in
contrast to "common knowledge" about the Sadducees.
A. Eschatology
- The term eschatology refers to "a branch of theology concerned with
the final events in the history of the world or mankind" (Webster's Ninth
New Collegiate Dictionary, Massachusetts, 1986). Eschatology implies a
type of time-line in which the involved participants are positioned
somewhere in close relation to the last-days (or end-times).
- Eschatology is not applied only to religions of the past, but lives on
today, especially in the "Abrahamic" traditions (Judaism, Christianity,
Islam). For example, current Christian "fundamentalism" includes
eschatological perspectives and expectations (as our own Dr. Kraft will
attest from his backrgound). Eschatological views like the interpretation
of Mussolini's invasion of Ethiopia prior to WW II, or WW II itself, as
evidence of the nearness of the last days, are echoed in the pesharim
found among the DSS. There is a constant updating involved in eschatology,
and persons with such an outlook always feel themselves to be living in
"the last days."
- Some of the earliest instances of developed eschatological thought in
Judaism occur in the Greco-Roman period (approximately 330 BCE onwards)
with works such as Daniel, Enoch/Watchers, and Jubilees.
- Apocalyptic eschatology is a subset of eschatology, the key to which is
revelation, or more explicity, the belief that God reveals certain
detailed things about the end-time. It includes a strong focus on
symbolism. Apocalyptic eschatology was a very graphic subset of
eschatology and we will see some very interesting examples of it in the
Dead Sea Scrolls.
- The people who left the DSS and other such groups at that time were
preparing for the final crisis in the world, and were waiting for God to
correct all the problems. They used value laden terms such as "Teacher of
Righteousness" and "wicked people," and intervention expectations such as
"Messiah" (anointed agent) in their eschatological vocabulary.
- In the scrolls, there is not much attention paid to the idea of
"resurrection," though it may be simply that resurrection was a concept
taken for granted and therefore not explicitly noted. The absence of any
resurrection references would be especially significant insofar as
resurrection is usually a concept associated with eschatology (compare,
e.g. Daniel 12.2). However, the failure to find clear resurrection
references does not in itself confirm or deny anything.
- Eschatological texts found among the DSS fall into two broad
categories: "sectarian" -- those that seem to have been written by the
scroll people for their own use (for example, the War Scroll); and adopted
or appropriated -- documents that were written by others but which the
scroll people copied and used for their own purposes (for example, the
presumably scriptural works such as the Enoch materials, Jubilees,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel). Even if you look at sectarian texts in the
strictest sense of the word, meaning that there seems to be no way that
the particular text could have been imported from outside the group (the
Manual of Discipline, for example), you still find evidence of
eschatology. Eschatology was definitely an important aspect of life for
the DSS people.
B. Circumcision (tangent)
- Another curious omission in the Dead Sea Scrolls concerns circumcision.
There seems to be no mention of circumcision in the Scrolls. This again
does not confirm anything since this concept may have been so obvious to
the scroll people that they thought it went without saying.
- The DSS community had specified purity rituals, such as the
required pre-meal bath, which make the omission of mention of circumcision
even more curious.
- In the class discussion, it was suggested that if the theory that the
DSS community was celibate were true, that could account for the lack
of mention of circumcision (if there were no children and only Jewish
converts, everyone was already circumcised before they joined the group).
- At this point, Dr. Kraft (blessed be he) pointed out the existence of
an article in the latest BA (Biblical Archaeologist) which presents the
evidence for the presence of women at Qumran by providing statistics from
the excavated graveyards as well as looking at some texts.
C. Eschatological Groups
- From the time period in which we are interested, several groups with
significantly "eschatological" interests are known, in contrast to the
Sadducees: e.g. the Pharisees, Essenes (and/or DSS people, according to
one's view of their relationship), Zealots (and/or Sicarii?), and
Nazarenes (an early designation for "Christian" Jews).
- Eschatology was associated with the Pharisees as the major way of
differentiating them from the Sadducees. This differentiation was mainly
attested by early Christian authors while Jewish authors tended to
emphasize halakhic issues.
- In the New Testament, several texts point out the differing opinions
held by the Pharisees and the Sadducees on resurrection. The Pharisees
were said to believe in life after death and resurrection, while the
Sadducees were said not to believe in resurrection (though not
necessarily throwing away all hope of a belief in the hereafter).
- Josephus provides us with some of the earliest information on these
groups. In his "Antiquities" (13.288ff; see also 13.171ff), Josephus
refers to the Pharisees and Sadducees during his account of the Maccabean
rule of John Hyrcanus (135-104 BCE). This was during the height of the
Maccabean (Hasmonean) power, and it was during this time that the
Sadducees and Pharisees are depicted as disputing for power. Thus we are
introduced to the names of these two groups, as well as to what they
disputed. [For further detailed discussion of these matters, see Steve
Mason, Flavius Josephus on the Pharisees (Brill 1991).] Whether and to
what extent one can assume that the same characteristics found generations
later among the groups that bear these same names, such as at the time of
the first revolt against Rome (66-73 CE), were present in the earlier
period (and vice versa), is problematic. Continuity of name does not
guarantee continuity of outlook.
- Josephus gives us further information on these groups, including the
Essenes (see War 2.119ff, Antiquities 13.171ff, 18.1ff). He says the
Pharisees focus on the explication of laws (halakha) and allow much power
to fate and God, with some small amount of free will. He talks about
transmigration of souls (only good ones) which may also imply that the
Pharisees believed in resurrection. Josephus says the Pharisees are
friendly to one another and have a regard for the public.
- The Sadducees, according to Josephus, believed in free will entirely,
without mediation by God. They also disregarded immortality of the
soul. The Sadducees were also described by Josephus as bizarre in their
relationships with each other.
- Josephus aligns himself with the Pharisees later in his life when he
pictures them as relatively more flexible and popular, and the Sadducees as
"aloof" and presumably interested in preserving the "status quo."
- The "Zealots" (whose name paradoxically comes from the Greek
"enthusiasts" or "fanatics") were militaristic about their Judaism. This
is one reason they are often believed to be identical to the radical
"Sicarii" (which means people who carry daggers) described by Josephus --
Josephus associates these groups without calling them identical in War
7.252-274. Josephus traces the lineage of the Sicarii to Judas the
Galilean (e.g. War 7.253), whom he also identifies with the unnamed Jewish
"Fourth Philosophy" (Antiq 18.9, 23). At the very least, these two
movements are related in terms of conduct, for Josephus.
- Josephus, after his relocation to Rome following his surrender to the
Romans in the Jewish revolt (approximately 66-73 CE), wanted a scapegoat
for the war. Josephus knew where his bread was buttered and wanted to
make the Romans feel better and Judaism in general not look so bad, so he
blamed the Sicarii-Zealots for the wars with the Romans in the literature
that provides us with all the information on these presumably
eschatological groups (see his "Jewish War," book 7, chapter 9 and 10 for
more information).
- Josephus also says that the "Fourth Philosophy" has similar views to
those of the Pharisees, which perhaps justifies their inclusion in a
grouping of eschatological sects (Antiq 18.23).
- The Essenes are a major focus in Josephus' description of the Jewish
groups in War 2, and they "live with a severer discipline." We will
discuss this group more extensively later. Josephus also mentions these
groups in Antiquities 18.9ff (written around 100 CE). When speaking of
the Pharisees in this later text, the reference to resurrection is much
stronger.
- Josephus generally avoids talk of eschatology in his works, perhaps
because (among other things) the eschatological views of his time depicted
the those nasty Romans (= the "Kittim"), Josephus' benefactors, as the
ungodly endtime adversary. Note how he avoids the subject in his treatment
of the book of Daniel.
//end dss.950207//
DSS.950209(=#08) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 9 February 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Asaf Cohen, recorder; Mark Berman, shadow
1. Administrative:
Everyone must sign up for the next round of minutes taking [each student
is to be a "primary" reviewer once, and a "shadow" once]. Everyone must
decide on a book to review -- these review are due by spring break (begins
3 March). The review should be between 500-700 typed words in length, and
submitted in electronic form for distribution to the group. Using
VanderKam (and Fitzmyer) as point of comparison, the review should provide
a brief summary of the book, then critically evaluate the work as it
compares with the aforementioned "standard" presentation(s). If one has a
personal opinion, then he or she should include it in the review, with
supporting evidence as appropriate.
On Tuesday 2/14/95 Devora Dimant (Tel Aviv University), a member of the
DSS Team, will guest lecture. You have been sent a brief bibliography of
some of her work so that you will be aware of the sorts of things that
have interested her and can ask relevant questions. On Thursday Ross
Kraemer will focus on Philo's account of the Theraputae (which is very
similar to his account of the Essenes) and the question of the extent of
the involvement of women in such ancient "religious" groups, including
Qumran and the DSS. Review what the textbooks say about Philo's treatment
of these groups.
2. Examination of 4Q180-181 "Ages of Creation" fragments (xeroxed from
pp. 211ff of Gracia Martinez).
Dr. Kraft handed out xerox copies of 4Q180 and 4Q181. (Devorah Dimant
published on these eschatologically relevant fragments in 1979.)
There are 6 fragments of 4Q180. Fragments 2-6 are very fragmentary and
there are many bracketed sections, [...], indicating missing words. Many
of these blanks were not filled because of uncertanity as to what belongs
there. Some brackets are filled in such as (frg 1, line 7) the words
"penetrated the daughters of man." The editors were able to guess at this
phraseology because it is used in other places and because it fit well
with the subject matter in the preserved sections.
There is not much information from fragments 5-6. This is a good example
of what the scholars have to work with and why it is taking such a long
time. Often it is not possible to be cetain as to how much text is between
the different fragment clusters -- e.g. whether unjoined fragments come
from the same column, or adjacent columns, etc.
Fragement 1 --
This fragment is unusual for beginning at what seems to be the actual
beginning of a sentence or section. The reference to various "ages" shows
that the ancient author(s) thought of consecutive periods of time on a
timeline. The word [heavenly] before "tablets" is a reasonable
reconstruction because the phrase "heavenly tablets" is found elsewhere in
the DSS and related literature. The concept of a timeline is extremely
important because apocalyptic predictions are often associated with a
timeline that God describes, such as the "70 weeks of years" spoken of in
the biblical book of Daniel (e.g. 9.24) and associated with the arrival of
"an anointed one" (a "messiah"). Note the reference to the 70th week in
4Q181 frg 2.
The italicized word "blank" in the translated fragements indicates a space
left blank in the written line by its scribe or author. Most writing in
DSS Hebrew has small divisions between words (most ancient Greek writing
has no word divisions at all!). This larger, 3-4 letter wide "blank" space
might suggest something like a sentence or paragraph indicator. The
small raised "c" at the start of "Azaz'el" indicates that the letter "A"
represents a Hebrew ayin, rather than an alef which sometimes also will
be represented by the English letter "a" (but preceded by ' -- in the
name `Azaz'el, the letter "'e" is an alef).
From the phrase, "sired giants by them," we know that a nearby lacuna (a
missing section, between brackets) should mention women.
Fragment 2 --
We know that fragment 2 relates to fragment 1 (although not necessarily in
this order), because the handwriting and context are similar and both
fragments are in the pesher format. There is a "(?)" by the word "Lot,"
and this is probably due to uncertainty about whether is is a personal
name or not. We see the eschatological orientation in the mention of such
items as angels and sinfulness and judgment.
4Q181 fragment 2 --
This story of the procreation of giants is very similar to the tradition
found in the biblical book of Genesis (6.1-4) concerning the "sons of God"
and the "Nephilim." We are doing frament 2 before fragment 1 because once
these fragments were studied, the scholars realized that what had already
been labelled as fragment 2 probably comes before fragment 1. The kinds
of words in fragment 2 such as, "knowing, knowlege" show that there is a
vibrant interest in knowledge. This sets us up for the sorts of
revelation and awareness that permeate "apocalyptic" literature including
many of the DSS.
Fragment 1--
Just because the fragment mentions "the community," it does not
necesseraly mean that it is a "secterian" writing of the DSS community in
the sense that the "Manual of Discipline" is called sectarian (presumably
originating in the DSS community). But regardless of whether 4Q180-181
originated with the DSS community, it became part of that "library" and
tells us something about what they read and copied.
As a side comment on God and gendered language: God is always mentioned as
a "he." However, when the documents and traditions speak of certain key
aspects of God's activity, such as his spirit or wisdom, a feminine noun
is used.
The use of the phrase, "the end," makes it clear that we are in the world
of eschatological thought. One must not be thrown off by the phrase,
"[community of] the gods." Such references to a divine group are also
found in the bible and apparently were not seen to compromise "monotheism"
as they understood it. "Holy ones," can mean angels, "watchers," and
similar extra-human agents.
3. The similar traditions in Genesis 6.1-4 and "1 Enoch."
Dr. Kraft then read this passage from the Genesis version. Different
English translations of the Bible may render the Hebrew "sons of God" in
different ways, such as "divine beings." Always try to use two or more
different translations if you are unable to read the original language
being translated!
Heavenly Beings are a main theme in the "Book of the Watchers," which is
the first 36 chapters of "1 Enoch," itself a collection of at least five
works that have clear divisions or "seams" between them. This material
probably originated in Hebrew because our oldest fragments are from the
DSS, in Hebrew. Before the DSS discoveries the oldest complete copy was
written over a 1000 years later, in Ethiopic.
"1 Enoch" is usually included among the "pseudipigrapha," and in the past
there has been a tendency to refer to bible-like material in such works as
"rewritten Bible," but Dr. Kraft prefers to categorize it as
"parabiblical" (see also Garcia Martinez). The category "para-biblical"
does not insinuate which work, for example Genesis or the Book of the
Watchers, was written first or has some sort of "priority."
Dr. Kraft then read from 1 Enoch 12. In the ancient Israelite traditions,
Enoch is one of the decendants of Seth, who is the third son of Adam and
Eve. In 1 Enoch (Watchers) 12, he is described as being hidden. In the
biblical narrative, Enoch is the 7th generation from Adam, and is
described as not dying (Gen 5.24); thus he comes to play a special role in
various traditions. Enoch predates the flood. Enoch becomes the scribe of
righteousness and meets the "Watchers." He is sent by God to tell the
Watchers who abandoned the high heaven that they have sinned and will not
be forgiven. He tells Azaz'el that he will not have peace because he is
among those who sinned. This provides an alternate explanation for the
origin of evil among humans, in comparison to to the Eden story.
Chapter 6ff of 1 Enoch (Watchers), contains a similar story of the fall of
the Watchers. In this version, Shemyaz, the leader of the Watchers does
not consent to lead them down to earth until they all agree to make an
oath to commit the act together and not back out. Then, they descend to
Mount Hermon. They find human-born women who give birth to giants (known
also as Nephilim, 450 feet tall, etc.). These giants commit sinful acts
against birds, beasts, and reptiles. They also drink blood. Azaz'el is
mentioned here for teaching the men how to make weapons.
//end of dss.950209//
DSS.950214(=#09) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 14 February 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorded by Dan Werlin and Sally Carpenter
Today's very special guest speaker: Devorah Dimant of Haifa University
[with RAK's apologies for previously misidentifying her home institution]
Dr. Dimant presented some of her personal items of research to the DSS
class today. Her main focus was on her recently published collection of
articles edited with Larry Schiffman entitled Time To Go Into the
Wilderness> (Leiden: Brill, 1994). These articles provide a more
complete picture of the entire DSS collection and its relation to Qumran.
According to Dimant, all the reconstructions of the Qumran community
up to now were based mainly on the sectarian literature found in Cave One.
This literature includes such works as The Rule of the Community (1QS),
The War Rule (1QM), and The Thanksgiving Scroll (1QH). For the most part,
the major cave which held 70% of the recovered scrolls, Cave Four, has
been mostly unpublished and unpublicized. Therefore, theories about the
communtiy were formed from only a part of the evidence. We are now in a
better position to list what types of literature existed and to reclassify
the entire Qumran library as follows:
1. 30% of the library consists of purely (Jewish) biblical literature.
The only books of the Hebrew Bible not found at Qumran were Esther and
Nehemiah.
2. 25% of the library consists of texts explicitly related to the life and
ideas of the community ("sectarian" literature).
3. 30% of the library consists of texts _not_ explicitly related to the
community, including, but not limited to, apocalyptic works.
4. 15% of the library consists of unidentified fragments.
In describing the apocalyptic materials, Dimant noted that they are mostly
written in Aramaic, whereas the sectarian literature is all in Hebrew.
She further claims that the influence of Persian/Babylonian culture can be
seen in the dualistic opposition of good and evil found in the
apocalypses. Dimant differentiated apocalyptic literature from sectarian
texts by noting that the apocalypses do not employ the characteristic
sectarian terminology and they could have been written (and used) by
others outside the DSS community.
Dimant found that Cave 4 also contained sectarian wisdom literature (like
the biblical collection of Proverbs), a genre not found in Cave 1. This
wisdom literature is full of previously unattested Hebrew words and
expressions -- a fact which she uses to bolster her claim that they are
sectarian> texts.
Dimant also discussed her thoughts on the origin of the Qumran community.
Apparently, when the first scrolls cave was found, no connection was made
with the Qumran site because the first cave was 2 km distant from the
site. Only after other caves were found was a clear connection made. The
pottery remains in the caves and at the Qumran site are identical. Some
of the pottery forms are unique to this complex and not found elsewhere.
Furthermore, some of the caves, including Cave 4, are man made and
inaccesible without passing through the Qumran site. Since, in addition,
every one of the other scroll bearing caves contains 1 or 2 copies of
scrolls found also in Cave 4, Dimant thinks it a certainty that all these
caves and the Qumran site were connected.
Dimant then discussed the function of the Qumran complex. She said that
Qumran could not have been a fortress, as others (e.g. Norman Golb) have
hypothesized, since it is far too poorly fortified. Furthermore, the 6
ritual baths would be quite unnecessary at a small military outpost, and
the 1000+ graves of men, women, and children, including people of advanced
years, would be most out of place in the military cemetary of a small
outpost. She responded forcefully to Golb's arguments to the contrary.
Dimant also examined the possibilities of who the members of Qumran were.
Certainly, the Qumran community resembled Josephus' description of the
Essenes, who lived in such Judaean communities remarkably similar to
Qumran. However, Dimant also examined Larry Schiffman's belief in a
Sadducean Qumran, based on an analyisis of 4QMMT. This work is written in
letter form from a group writing in the 1st person plural (we) to the
leader of another group. The letter is an enumeration of 22 halakic
disputes between the two parties. Five of these disputes are known from
the Mishna (a compilation of rabbinic law codified c. 200 CE). The
position taken by the writers of 4QMMT is the opposite of the position
taken by the Rabbis in the Mishna, but identical to the (rejected)
position attributed by the Mishna to the Sadducees. This presents a
problem. If the DSS people were Essenes, why did they follow Sadducean
law? Schiffman claims that the DSS people were> Sadducees.
Baumgarten, on the other hand, thinks the they were Essenes who followed a
few Sadducean practices. The answer, Dimant says, is probably more
complex than either of these two positions.
//end dss.950214//
DSS.950216(=#10) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 16 February 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorded by Karen Farji and Chanan Tigay
Guest speaker Ross S. Kraemer, who did her PhD dissertation at Princeton
on Ecstatics and Ascetics: Studies in the Functions of Religious
Activities for Women in the Greco-Roman World> (1976) including
attention to Philo's Therapeutae; Author of Maenads, Martyrs, Matrons,
Monastics: a Sourcebook on Women's Religions in the Greco-Roman World>
(Fortress 1988), and more recently Her Share of the Blessings: Women's
Religions Among Pagans, Jews, and Christians in the Greco-Roman World>
(Oxford 1992).
Foci of dicussion:
-- The article in Biblical Archeology> 57/4 (December 1994) by Linda
B. Elder, "The Women Question and Female Aesthetics Among the Essenes" (a
copy can be found in the ReligSt graduate lounge, 414 Duhring), addresses
the issue of women (and children) at Qumran and more broadly in the other
Jewish communities of the period.
-- This introduces the question of attitudes to gender not only among the
Essenes but in the ancient writers like Philo of Alexandria and Josephus
who describe the Essenes and the similar "Therapeutae," a monastic Jewish
community that provides the only surviving piece of detailed evidence
about the participation of women in such a community.
Observations on the ancient accounts of Essenes:
The DSS seem to derive from a community of men. Part of this perception
comes from the texts themselves -- i.e. the laws and regulations which are
directed specifically at men. Other sources which lead to this perception
are what writers in antiquity such as Josephus have written about the
Essenes. This theory implies that the people in Qumram were in fact the
Essenes; most scholars today accept this view.
Josephus in the "Jewish War" 2.118-122 describes 3 forms of Jewish
"philosophy": the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. He writes the
following about the Essenes: "marriage they disdain, but they adopt other
men's children while yet pliable and docile" -- children implying sons. In
general, it was common in antiquity to abandon unwanted children (although
it is uncertain whether or to what extent this was true of Jews), thus
providing an ample source for adoptions. According to Josephus, the
Essenes did not think there was anything inherently wrong with marriage,
but thought they could not trust women and therefore did not marry. A
question worth asking is whether Josephus was recording the facts as they
were or if he was adding his own comment. Yet, Josephus mentions one order
of Essenes who did marry (War 2.160-161) because "they think that those
who decline to marry cut out the chief function of life...the propagation
of the race". They give their wives a 3 year probation and only marry
after the woman's potential fertility is proved. Furthermore, they do not
have intercourse with them during pregnancy to show that their real motive
is the propagation of the race.
Other ancient writers confirm Josephus' statement that the Essenes do not
marry, in particular Philo who says that "no Essene takes wife" -- an
indication of the male make-up of the community -- "because a wife is a
selfish creature, excessively jealous and an adept at beguiling the morals
of her husband and seducung him by her continuous impostures" (Hypothetica
11.14; Kraemer is inclined to believe that this passage is about Philo's
own views on women). While Josephus says Essenes worry about women
seducing other men, Philo's description of their concern is about women
seducing their own husbands away from spiritual matters. He mentions
nothing of the order of Essenes who do marry; neither do any of the other
ancient writers.
The Dead Sea Scrolls evidence
Nothing in the scrolls as currently available makes it clear that there
were women living in the DSS community; quite to the contrary, much of the
content of the scrolls is specifically oriented toward a male community.
The evidence of the Qumran graves (see the Biblical Archeology article)
The excavations of the Qumran burial sites have lead some scholars to
question the theory of an exclusive male membership. A main cemetery
holding about 1000 graves has been found at Qumran along with two
secondary ones. A total of 1200 graves is estimated. The problem lies in
that only about 50 graves have been opened (in the 1950's and '60's) and
the rest are unlikely to be opened because of resistance in some Jewish
sectors in Israel to the desecration of Jewish graves. Of the graves
excavated, 9 contained women (one with a child), 36 men and 6 children
(gender not specified). Only 3 women were found in the main cemetery, the
rest were in adjacent areas and cemeteries. Because of this, some
scholars have argued that these women were not members of the community,
but perhaps travelers who died on their journey (or some other type of non
member). The fact that the alignment of the women's tombs was often
different from the majority may support this theory (if the alignment of
graves was a significant part of their religious system). The problem with
prooving this is that we usually don't have information about everyday
practices such as burials because the ancient people were so familiar with
such practices that writers don't find it necessary to write about them.
Both Josephus and Philo estimated the total number of Essenes at 4000.
This does not explain why there are only 1200 graves (especially if they
lived there for more than 100 years). A possible explanation is that many
people in antiquity, and Jews in particular, practiced secondary burial
where bones were desiccated and put into a box (an "ossuary") to be buried
later elsewhere, such as in a family grave. Yet no evidence of secondary
burial has been found so far at Qumran. Only if the remaining graves are
explored will we have more answers.
The DSS texts:
The mention of women in the DSS texts presents an interpretative problem:
it is found within the context of legal discussions that may be either
THEORETICAL or ESCHATOLOGICAL and thus would not necessarily suggest the
actual presence of women. The texts are directly drawn out of the law
codes of the scriptures and furthermore, an eschatological community would
not have been concerned with having offspring.
Based on the text 4Q502 -which Garcia Martinez includes under "4Q Ritual
of Marriage," some argue that the presence of women was not simply
hypothetical or eschatological. Based mainly on Fragments 19 and 24,
Joseph Baumgarten [Journal of Jewish Studies 34 (1983) 125-35] has argued
that this is not a marriage ritual, but a ritual of old age. He says these
two fragments are indicative of the whole fragment. The ritual would then
be an honoring of elders in the community (both men and women).
Philo on the Therapeutae:
Philo describes a monastic community called the Therapeutae in his essay
"On the Contemplative Life". He contrasts this community, whose members
lead a "contemplative life," with the Essenes that he described in the
sister tractate "Every Good Man is Free," who he claims lead an "active
life" (they farmed, engaged in commerce, etc.). The Therapeutae ate only
bread and water (therefore, they must have had money since they apparently
didn't make the bread, so they must have bought it with money they had
brought with them). Philo claims that such people lived in many places
throughout the world, but their main center was on the shores of the
Mareotic Lake (and the Mediterranean) just west of Alexandria.
At least since the time of Eusebius (early 4th century CE), Philo's
description was thought to be of an early Christian monastic community.
Only since the late 19th century has it been proven otherwise. There is
also some debate about whether Philo has imaginatively created this
community, because nobody else mentions it (nor do any texts survive from
the community itself) and it could have been the embodiment of his ideal
community (he shows great admiration for them). Kraemer believes it was
more likely a real community.
Philo mentions both men and women Therapeutae. They study philosophy,
allegorical texts and scriptures in individual cells during the week and
come together in a common sanctuary on the Sabbath (seventh) day. The
whole ceremony is described as a model of mystical experience, drawing
upon Greek ideas of mystical encounters in the cult of Dionysus.
An important point is the mention of these women as "aged virgins".
Kraemer believes that "aged" in this case refers to post-menopausal women.
This is significant because Philo suggests elsewhere that women who do not
menstruate are no longer considered women. In Philo's philosophical
system, becoming MALE is an essential part of his belief. Just as the
soul's (feminine word in Greek) ultimate goal is to become male and
virgin, the women can become male now that they are no longer
menstruating. And since such women aren't really women any longer, they
can do all the things men do (except perhaps sit together with men in this
common sanctuary; Philo does say that the genders are separated).
If Baumgarten is right and there are women among the DSS Essenes, the idea
of having "aged women" would not contradict the need for purity in the
community (according to Philo's theory that women become men after
menopause) -- a major concern among the DSS people. One theory holds that
they are there in the wilderness because they want to separate themselves
from an impure community in Jerusalem. These men could have been worried
that menstruating women would render them impure. They felt that ritual
purity would place them in a special relationship with God.
Dr. Ross S. Kraemer concluded by saying that it is very easy to forget
about women in antiquity because almost everything that we know or are
taught is oriented toward the experiences of men. Let the reader beware!
//end dss.950216//
DSS.950221(=#11) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 21 February 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Primary recorder: Reuben Wetherbee;
person to see if he screwed up: Jacob Jaffe
Usual Begining Clean-up Stuff:
1> Book Reviews due on Friday March 3. Try to have it in on time. Length
should be about 2 type written pages. Submit electronically to RAK.
2> The weekly swim-team comment and repartee with Hunter by RAK.
3> The video of Ross Kraemer' class presentation and the audio tape of
Devorah Dimant's are available. Ask RAK if interested.
4> The Garcia Martinez translations still have not been recieved in the
Book Store. Coming in from the Netherlands. [Update 2/23 -- they have
arrived!]
5> CD-ROM -- only place you can find a fully functioning set up is in
During Wing. We will use this material more after the spring break.
Note on differing traslations of scrolls (with particular reference to the
translations provided by the CD-ROM): When looking at scrolls, it would be
good to check more than one translation. For instance, the translation of
the copper plaque/scroll by Garcia Martinez is quite different from John
Allegro's (on the CD-ROM). In general, the translations in Garcia Martinez
could be somewhat flawed at times since they basically have been
translated into English from the original Spanish edition (1992), itself
made from the Hebrew and Aramaic. As we have noted before, Gaster's
translation avoids being woodenly literal in an attempt to render the
meaning as Gaster understood it -- this can be very useful, especially
when used in conjunction with a more literal approach.
?Why is the Schiffman Hypothesis of Sadducean origins of the scrolls not
more popular? [see VanderKam 93ff for details]
The Sadducean hypothesis is relatively recent, appearing in force only in
the past decade or so. The hypothesis primarily depends on the 4QMMT
document which has aquired various titles such as "Some Things from the
Torah." The official edition was published quite recently, and it was
first made widely available in a privately distributed version from a DSS
conference in Poland a few years ago.
4QMMT appears to be a "halakhic letter" in which the author discusses some
ways in which he feels the scriptural laws should be interpreted. About 5
of these disputed laws are identifiable as points of contention between
Sadducees and Pharisees which were also mentioned in rabbinic literature.
Possibly that the name "Sadducees" itself is derived from the ancient
priestly family of Zadok or Zaddukim. The scroll people also speak of
themselves as "sons of Zadok." Whether this suffices to identify the
groups is problematic.
Some have argued that the apocryphal work "The Wisdom of Ben Sirach" (also
called "Ecclesiasticus") was written by a Sadducee since there is no
mention of eschatological issues, which according to other sources were
not a Sadducean concern. One problem with the Sadducean hypothesis is
that it doesn't match up with the evident eschatological nature of the
authors of the DSS. RAK supposes that Schiffman probably thinks the
community was rooted in an older Sadducean tradition, but could not be
termed strictly Sadducean in the sense found in Josephus and other such
sources. [See further VanderKam 94f.]
Sources Referring to Sadducees:
Never mentioned in Philo and Pliny. Josephus treats them briefly in his
accounts of the Jewish "sects." New Testament and rabbinic writings
mention them in various connections. Most accounts don't portray
Sadducees in a good light.
?Do we know that all the documents originated in the same community?
At one level, clearly not. The biblical texts, for example, did not
originate with the DSS people, although they may have been copied by those
people. Emanuel Tov has attempted to ascertain if there are physical
characteristics shared by some of the texts that would indicate common
origin of those texts as copies -- how the tetragrammaton is handled,
spacing between words, etc. (scribal habits; see Fitzmyer 11b for
details). Others have looked for characteristic vocabulary and themes.
The category "sectarian texts" attempts to identify those materials most
probably generated by the group (not just copied by them).
It is still to early to tell if even the "sectarian texts" represent the
perspectives of a single, unified group, or whether we can reconstruct the
ideas and practices of such a group from the texts. It is also possible
that just because they had these texts in their library does not mean they
agreed with or followed the teachings contained in the texts, or for that
matter, that they interpreted the texts in the way we would expect them
to. (Modern examples abound.)
Roughly half of the DSS material was previously known (e.g. biblical or
apocryphal or pseudepigraphic). The remainder is not necessarily entirely
homogeneous or "sectarian." A good starting point for discussing
"sectarian compositions" is the Manual of Discipline (1QS), the Damascus
Document (CD) and other "initiation" texts that deal with the background
and the running of a community. But it is not impossible or unthinkable
that even such texts might have been "imported" to the community.
?How did Devorah Dimant classify the documents?
According to an article read by Hunter for his review project, she views
the scrolls as a library with some sort of classification in terms of
the subject treated. Sort of like an ancient Dewey Decimal system? RAK
suggested that her interest in "para biblical" materials, for example,
and in the Aramaic apocalyptic grouping, may contribute to this
impression.
Primary Theme of the Day: Three Primary Authors concerning Essenes
1. Philo
Philo lived in the first half of the first century. The year of his death is
uncertain. General belief is that he died soon after 40 CE because that
is the last we hear from him. RAK suspects that he was still around
(and writing) in 67-68 and described a crisis that occured in Alexandria
around that time. He would have been in his 80's, probably.
Two accounts in Philo:
1."Every Good Man is Free" (EGMF) -- perhaps written pre 40. Philo is
usually called a "philosopher" but his main interest seems to be
concerned with inner states -- what we might call "psychology." He
describes the Essenes as an example of true human freedom and virtue.
2. "Hypothetica" (or "Apology for the Jews") -- not known directly but from
quotations by the early Christian writer Eusebius (4th century). Possibly
this account of the Essenes was written earlier than the other.
Some characteristics of Essenes claimed in both works: the name denotes
their piety (Greek, hosios); they are older men, without children, not
holding property or slaves, pooling resources, engaged in agriculture and
crafts, common meals, care for their sick, with a structured community for
resource distributation. Both accounts end with stating that even the
worst tyranical rulers held esteem for the Essenes.
Of special interest in Hypothetica:
Live in many cities and villages of Judea. Even clothing is shared.
Occupations include herds and bee keeping.
Of special interest in EGMF: They live only in villages, not in cities, in
Syro-Palestine; about 4000 in number; they don't sacrifice living animals;
they manufacture some products, but not weapons; nature is their parent;
they meet every 7 days in synagogues (note Philo's usually does not use
the term synagogue but does so for Essenes) to read and interpret
scriptures; they refuse to take oaths.
Something to think about: No weapons used but apparently some medicine.
The "Fallen Angels" in some traditions taught people how to use herbs and
how to make weapons. Is this significant? Let's watch for how weapons are
treated in the War Scroll (1QM). Also, one of the ancient sources mentions
that some Essenes travel armed, for protection. Note also that Philo does
not place the Essenes in only one location (community).
2. Josephus
Two main sources
1. Jewish War - written probably in the late 70s ce.
2. Antiquities - written around 100 c.e.
Wants reader to believe that he writes about such things from personal
experience. Claims in "Vita" (autobiographical defense) that he had tried
out all three major sects as a youth. Even went to live in the wilderness
with someone named Banus. Even before the DSS were discovered, J. Thomas
(in French) argued that there were various "baptizing movements" in
Syro-palesting at this time, of which Banus might have been an example.
War 2.120-161:
Describes all three sects (Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and in the
process glorifies Essenes and trashes the Sadducees. Also says there is a
subset of Essenes that marry. Never claims the Essenes are only in one
place, but mentions that they reside in many cities.
Antiquities 13.172: Distinguishes the "sects" in terms of their views of
fate. Antiquities 18.18ff: Sketches life of Essenes: God in charge of
destiny, soul is immortal, have disputes with temple in Jerusalem, engage
in agriculture, pool resources, have own priests, no wives, own no slaves,
number about 4,000 (Philo also mentions this, a common source is
possible). In mentioning relationship with the temple he does not mention
that the temple has already been destroyed -- perhaps he is referring to
an earlier standard account from before 70 ce.
3. Pliny Source: "Natural History" -- written about 77 ce (see Vanderkam
72). "Natural History" kind of like a travel guide for Palestine and other
areas. Essenes described as: No women, no money, just palm trees. Pick up
refugees and people who are tired of life and looking for something
different.
Locates the Essene community on the west of the Dead Sea, with Engedi
lying "below" it. Dispute as to whether this means "to the south of" or
"down the hill from" (or something else). Sequence from Essenes to
En-gedi to Masada suggest it is "to the south of," which would be
consistent with the location of Qumran. Note that, unlike Philo and
Josephus, Pliny places Essenes strictly in one place.
Connection of Essenes to Philo's Theraputae:
As we saw last class, the Theraputae are described by Philo in "On The
Contemplative Life". He himself makes connection between his account of
the Essenes in EGMF and his account of the Theraputae. States that
Essenes are in the "service" of God and interprets "Theraputae" to mean
"servants (of God)" or also "healers (of souls)." He claims that both
groups are found in many places but he describes one main location, near
Alexandria, for the Therapeutae. His descriptions of Essenes and
Theraputae show many features in common. Thus is is possible to argue
that the Therapeutae are of the same "type" as the Essenes, and the
evidence they provide can also be used, with caution.
//end dss.950221//
DSS.950223(=#12) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 23 February 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorders: Kathleen Hoffman with Christine Boulos
1. Administrative Stuff
--The Garcia Martinez translation textbooks (red books) are finally in the
Bookstore. It is important for members of the class to obtain these $30
texts because the remainder of the course will focus heavily on reading
the original source materials in English.
--Dr.Bob is going to create an index of the CD-ROM material so that the
class will be able to access specific texts and other information easily.
--Dr.Bob is toying with the suggestion of inviting Larry Schiffman,
esteemed DSS scholar and local cult hero, to visit the class.
--A reminder that book reviews are due, if possible, before Spring break
(March 3). Conceptually, a review should include two types of information:
(1) a balanced summary of what the reviewed book attempts to do, and (2)
an evaluation of the results, especially in comparison to other sources we
have used, specifically Fitzmyer and VanderKam. These aspects may be
intertwined, or kept separate, as suits the reviewer. The book review
need not exceed 800 words (about 4-5 screens of information) and should be
emailed to Dr.Bob. Hard copy is undesirable; we can save a tree! Finished
reviews will go to the electronic distribution list, and the gopher.
--Another reminder. Sign up for a second session of minute taking, or
you will be assigned some unnamed substitute task by Dr.Bob. This could
entail anything [within reason, of course!].
2. Questions from the class
--How is the "Masoretic Text" related to the Pentateuch and other
biblical texts extant at the time of the DSS?
The "Masoretic Text" (MT) is the most widely read and disseminated version
of the Jewish Bible. It was standardized from the Hebrew tradition around
800-1000 CE by the "Masoretes" in Palestine/Israel (especially Tiberias)
and in Babylonia. "Masoretes" is not a sect name, but rather refers to an
"activity" concerned with recording "tradition" (masorah) associated with
the biblical text. It is likely that Karaites were active among the
Masoretes.
Prior to the emergence of the vocalized MT, the extant texts were
"unpointed" or "consonantal," meaning that they lacked vowels except
occasionally as placeholders ("matres lectiones"). The MT tried to
eliminate vowel ambiguity in the written form by recording the tradition
of the words' pronunciation. This was done by marking the consonants by
one of two systems, the Tiberian and the Babylonian. The cadence and
stress were marked along with the vowels, facilitating reading the text
aloud. The MT also recorded traditional differences between
groups/regions, by noting where the oral reading ("qere") differed from
what was written ("katav" or "katab"). The special case of the
tetragrammaton is an example of this; the MT would indicate that "Adonai"
was to be spoken although "YHWH" was written.
Here, the question arises as to how we know how the Hebrew text was
pronounced at the time. Obviously, the written symbols could easily
represent different sounds to modern readers. One clue comes from the
Hexapla, a 6-columned work by the Christian scholar Origen, issued early
in the 3rd century CE. The first column contained the Hebrew/Aramaic text
in semitic characters, the second gave the same text in Greek
transliteration (thus giving some idea of pronunciation), and the other 4
provided various Greek translations, including some text critical markings
to indicate where the Hebrew and Greek versions differ. Additionally,
proper names and place names that are transliterated into various
languages may help indicate the Hebrew pronunciation. Finally, there exist
specific descriptions of the articulatory characteristics of sounds (and
their representations) from the time of the Masoretes.
However, Hebrew did have some dialectical differences which could have
affected pronunciation of the texts. Jewish communities flourished in the
Persian Gulf area (Babylon) as well as in Palestine/Israel, for example,
widely distant from each other. These similar but distinct "local"
traditions are reflected in the two extant versions of the Talmud -- the
Babylonian Talmud, which is what one normally thinks of as the classical
rabbinic version, and the Palestinian (or "Jerusalem") Talmud.
The DSS provide evidence of the situation with the earlier unpointed
consonantal texts. Indeed, they have pushed our knowledge of the Jewish
scriptures back 1000 years, through layers and layers of copies. One
reason why the unwritten tradition of the texts could be preserved for
centuries without recorded standardization was that in antiquity texts
were generally read aloud, and thus pronounced. Even in silent reading,
the lips were generally moving.
--What is the significance of the Murabba'at caves?
The Murabba'at caves are located south of Qumran on the west coast
of the Dead Sea. The DSS discoveries of the 1940's encouraged the Bedouin
and scholars to search among the Dead Sea cliffs for other valuable
remains. Findings from other sites of discoveries in the Judean desert
are generally included under the broad heading of DSS, although they may
not be related to the Qumran group at all. These sites include:
--Khirbet Mird
--Wadi Murabba'at (a wadi is a dry riverbed, in case you were wondering)
--Nahal Hever
--Nahal Mishmar
--Nahal Se'elim
--Masada (site of the fortress that was the last outpost of the 1st
revolt)
--Wadi ed-Daliyah -- its inclusion in this group is questionable. The
site is in the Samaritan area, NW of the Dead Sea [Fitzmyer p.1 is in
error on the location] and most of the material found there dates much
earlier than the DSS and is not related to it.
For specific information about these sites and their materials, you need
to consult a source such as the Anchor Bible Dictionary> in addition
to the Fitzmyer (e.g. p.26) and VanderKam texts. Some important remnants
from the "second revolt" (by Bar Kokhba/Cochba) have been recovered from
the Murabba'at and Nahal Hever caves.
3. Calendars and the DSS
Pliny, Philo and Josephus never mention the calendar of the Essenes as a
distinctive feature, aside from their use of the typical Jewish 7-day week
concluding with the "sabbath" rest day. However, Philo suggested that the
Theraputae had some unusual calendar-related practices (On the
Contemplative Life 64ff). He said they placed special importance on a
cycle consisting of a "week of weeks," or 7 weeks of 7 days apiece = 49
days, followed by a festive 50th day. It is not clear whether he means to
suggest cycles of 50 days throughout the year, or a specific yearly
festival in accord with the traditional Jewish holiday of Shavuot (from
which the Christian celebration of Pentecost derives).
Various unusual calendric emphases are found in the DSS texts. Even prior
to the DSS discoveries, the "pseudepigraphic" books of Jubilees and "1
Enoch" (Astronomical Book) provided glimpses of a calendar different from
what became traditional in rabbinic Judaism. Jubilees gets its name from
its arrangement of the history of Israel from the Garden of Eden until
Moses' reception of the Law on Mt. Sinai in terms of "Jubilees" -- 49 year
periods (see Leviticus 25.8ff). The presence of these texts, and others
similar to them, among the DSS is striking.
Note that in the middle ages, some Islamic and Jewish authors also refer
to an ancient Jewish group that followed a "different" calendar, and
called them "cave dwellers" (Magharians). These reports may have been
influenced by discoveries of DSS in the 8th century or even earlier.
References are found in the DSS to the celebration of the following
festivals otherwise not known to classical Judaism (see VanderKam p. 115):
--New Wine Festival
--Wood Festival
--New Oil Festival (Jake cleverly pointed out the incongruence of an oil
festival with a culture that considered oil a means of spreading impurity)
Notably absent are the "newer" (non-biblical) holidays of Rosh Hashanah
(civil new year) and Hannukah (Hasmonean/Maccabean revolt). Rosh Hashanah
was probably not observed because it was developed to mark the beginning
of the civil year in the fall (in distinction to the more traditional
"religious" new year, in the spring), and was presumably not accepted by
the DSS people as legitimate or appropriate, if they even knew about such
an observance. Hannukah, of course, is the celebration of the recovery of
the Temple by the Jews in the Hasmonean Revolt. This occured in 165 BCE,
roughly contemporaneous with the founding of the DSS community, but
the DSS people were not supporters of the Maccabees. In fact, they may
have founded their outpost in the desert partly because of the upheaval
connected with the revolt, and in reaction to its results.
The traditional Jewish rabbinic calendar, commonly referred to as
luni-solar, consists of 354 days per year (thus 11 1/4 days short of a
solar year), with an extra month added every 3rd year to bring it back
into sycronization with the agricultural seasons it reflects. The Muslim
calendar is strictly lunar consisting of 354 days without adjustment to
the solar cycles. Thus a solar century is approximately equal to 103 lunar
years.
The DSS people followed a solar calendar consisting of 12 months of 30
days each = 360 days, plus 4 extra days inserted between each 90 day (3
month) season = 364 days, which divides neatly into 52 weeks of 7 days.
This calendar is consistenly symmetrical and predictable. Each annual
festival always is held on the same day(s) of the week, year in and year
out. It is likely that they somehow adjusted for the 1 1/4 days per year
not accounted for, although we do not know how. Perhaps they invoked a
mini-jubilee at appropriate intervals (an extra month would be needed
every 24 years, which is about half a jubilee).
The fact that early Jewish communities had such differing calendars, has
been used to explain a curious inconsistency in the Christian traditions
about Jesus' last days. The Gospel of John reports that Jesus was
crucified when the passover lamb was being slaughtered, whereas the
synoptic gospels place that event prior to the crucifixion. Some
commentators suggest that Jesus and his followers used the solar calendar
for their celebration of Passover, as reported in the synoptics, while the
Gospel of John reflects the luni-solar reckoning which was used by most
Jews (including Jesus' main enemies). This is a clever solution, although
it does not solve all the problems of the discrepant accounts.
//end dss.950223//
DSS.950228(=#13) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 28 February 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorded by Lance "Sleeper" Allred and Hunter "Swimmer" Powell
Administrative and Preliminary Matters
The Garcia Martinez book has arrived (the red cover book of
English translations). If you want to be a overachiever you
should read ahead during spring break. Start at the start with
the major sectarian texts (Manual of Discipline = 1QS, Damascus
Document = CD), after which we will move on to escatalogical
material (War Scroll = 1QM), and the "para-biblical" materials.
Dr. Kraft had a brief show-and-tell period in which he showed off his
small "souvenir type" replica of the Manual of Discipline and
it's storage jar. He also put in a small plug by passing around
the recent "Discoveries in the Judean Desert" volume on the Greek
Minor Prophets scroll by Emanuel Tov, with collaboration by RAK.
We were also reminded of the correct spelling of VanderKam and
Fitzmyer, for reporting purposes.
Some "cleanup" questions ensued, as usual.
An attempt was made, again, to clarify some archeological aspects
of the Qumran site and the caves. Kraft reminded us that there
are many caves in the Qumran area, but only eleven had written
material included in the designation "DSS." The caves could have
been used for a variety of things, including habitation in some.
Kraft talked about the use of Carbon-14 dating of the scrolls,
and reminded us that this method can tell us when the tested
organic material (linen, leather, papyrus) began to be produced,
but it cannot necessarily tell us when the document was written
(e.g. leather hides collected decades earlier might be used at a
later date). The possibilities of DNA testing set the class off
onto a rampant discussion as to the chances of finding the
ancient location and even the modern descendants of animals that
were used for the leather of the DSS (including non inscribed
leather such as straps, sandals, etc.), or at least identifying
fragments that came from the hide of the same animal. The class
remained on this topic for a good twenty minutes, with such
random comments as "we could open another Jurassic Park!"
Kraft reminded us that although he might hesitate to identify the
DSS composers/users as "Essenes," he does recognize that the
scrolls evidence certain "Essene" characteristics similar to
those described by Josephus and Philo. The producers of the DSS
don't call themsevles Essenes, although they have various other
self-designations including (as Sigrid has just informed Lance
and Hunter) The Ya{.h}ad (the community). It is possible that
"Essene" was a designation used mainly by outsiders to describe a
type of outlook characteristic of various similar groups in the
area.
The Main Topic: Controversies
In the first decade of the DSS discoveries, many controversies
already surrounded the scrolls, as discussed especially by Millar
Burrows (The DSS> [1955] and More Light on the DSS>
[1957]). Solomom Zeitlin wrote many articles claiming that the
DSS were at best, medieval hoaxes, to be understood in relation
to movements such as the Karaites. His student, J. Teicher,
acknowledged that the scrolls were older than that, but
interpreted them as products of early "Jewish Christian" concerns
and developments (see, more recently, Robert Eisenman). John
Allegro, in his rise to noteriety, even suggested that the
"teacher of righteousness" had been crucified and was expected to
be resurrected, as a sort of prefigurement of what would later be
claimed for Jesus (see also J. Dupont-Sommer).
A special sidelight also associated with Allegro is "the Shapira
Affair": A Russian Jew by the name of W. M. Shapira moved to
Jeruselem around 1856 and opened an antiquities shop. He was
selling things as "Moabite" artifacts and a French scholar said
that they were fake. Some years later, in the 1870s, Shapira
obtained 15 leather strips from a Bedouin, who claimed to have
found them near the shore of the Dead Sea, containing what
Shapira determined to be Hebrew text of the book of Deuteronomy.
He took these stips to London where they were authenticated and
put on display in the British Museum. Once on display, the same
Frenchman came along and declared them to be fakes; the exibit
was taken down and the artifacts were sold very cheaply. Shapira,
disgraced, committed suicide. Allegro asks if perhaps these were
authentic "DSS" type materials, in his book on the subject. The
current whereabouts of these Shapira materials is unknown, if
they have survived at all.
(to be continued)
//end dss.950228//
DSS.950302(=#14) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 2 March 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert A. Kraft
Recorder: Jarid Lukin (solo)
Reminder: Book reviews are preferably due before Spring Break.
Format should follow that of IOUDAIOS Reviews (IOUD-REV). A sheet
of guidelines for these type of reviews was handed out at the
beginning of class today. These guidelines do not have to be held
to strictly, but you should have some sort of idea as to what the
tags mean.
Miscellaneous Information
=========================
The Garcia Martinez translation textbook (the big red one) also
contains a useful introduction to the Dead Sea Scrolls, but it
presupposes the sort of basic knowledge available in such
treatments as VanderKam and Fitzmyer. Dr. Kraft feels that the
class is ready and should be able to profit from this
introduction. It offers a good summary of the history of the
finds and discusses other topics such as what has been found in
the caves that might link them to the site at Qumran (i.e.
pottery), and what other "Judean Desert" caves have been found in
addition to those near Qumran. Read it.
The March/April Issue of the Biblical Archaeological Review
(BAR) is out. It has reviews of some books that some members of
the class have been reading and will be of more general interest:
Norman Golb, Who Wrote The Dead Sea Scrolls>;
Neil Asher Silberman, The Hidden Scrolls: Christianity,
Judaism, and the War for the Dead Sea Scrolls>;
Lawrence Schiffman, Reclaiming The Dead Sea Scrolls>.
A Historical Time Line To Help Put Things In Perspective
========================================================
For the continued discussion and understanding of various debates
over the scrolls, a broader picture of the historical context of
the scrolls, and of Judaism and early Christianity, is important:
2000 bce
Abraham and "the Patriarchs"
1500
Moses and Joshua
1000 David
Solomon (builds Jerusalem Temple)
"The Divided Kingdom (North and South)"
Fall of the Northern Kingdom to Assyria, around 721
Fall of Southern Kingdom (Judah) to Nebuchadnezzar of
Babylonia in 587/586, with destruction of the Temple
(Persian Empire; "Second Temple" established around 520)
500 / \
|
330 Alexander the Great, Greek World Empire
|
165 Hasmonean/Maccabean Revolt (against Greek Seleukids)
unrest -- "Hasidim," DSS group, etc.
|
63 (End of Hasmonean/Maccabean Independence)
|
2nd Temple Period (about 520 bce - 70 ce)
[0 bce/ce] |
30 Joshua/Jesus and the beginnings of "Christianity"
Philo |
\ /
70 Fall of Jerusalem ("First Revolt"), Qumran and Masada
Josephus
135 Bar Kokhba and the "Second Revolt" (Murabba'at)
325 Eusebius
Constantine -- Greco-Roman Emperor
Emergence of Classical Judaism
Emergence of Classical Christianity (no longer unrecognized
by the Romans as a distinct religion)
500 ce
How one views the DSS group in relation to their "biblical" and
"post-biblical" past, and in relation to the development of
"classical (rabbinic) Judaism" as well as early Christianity, has
a great influence on the debates over who they were and what
their significance may be. Especially controversial are the
perceived or imagined lines between the varieties of Judaism in
the "second Temple period" and what emerges as "classical
Judaism," on the one hand, and what develops into "early
Christianity" on the other.
As noted last class, the term "Essene" may or may not be a
general category imposed by outsiders on a certain group. There
is no first hand record of a community calling themselves
Essenes. The term Essene might come from a word meaning "pious"
and therefore, might be used to classify a certain type of piety
by an outsider. It is possible that there was no "official"
definition (however that would be determined!) for being
classified as an "Essene."
"Sadducee" does not seem to be such a nebulous designation. It is
applied to a specific class, an elite class closely associated
with the Jewish priesthood ("Zadokites" ?). It is presented as a
limited term unlike "Essene." The name Sadducee is first
introduced by Josephus in connection with the rule of John
Hyrkanus (135-104 bce). But Josephus wasn't alive and present at
that time. So, at best, he provides second hand evidence. The
same holds for Josephus' description of the emergence of the
"Pharisees" in the same period.
There are also other names of "Jewish groups" reported in ancient
sources (especially by early Christian writers) that lack any
useful description [see, for an introductory treatment, Marcel
Simon, Jewish Sects at the Time of Jesus> (Fortress 1967)]
-- e.g. Hemerobaptists, Masbothei, Genistae, Meristae, Galileans.
In antiquity, only two people from whom we have writings refer to
themselves as associated with "Pharisees": Paul and Josephus.
You cannot make a whole lot out of a religious grouping term
(i.e. Essene, perhaps even Pharisee) in and of itself. The
classifications were probably to some extent arbitrary
distinctions made by the authors, much as we use similar labels
even today -- ponder the various ways in which terms such as
"conservative/Conservative" function for us.
At this point, Irv questioned why it would be considered
problematic to draw a direct line back from "classical Judaism"
to the Pharisees. His point was that if we have a more or less
clear picture of classical Judaism, that sort of Judaism is not
likely to have emerged without connection to the same sorts of
ideas in its past. Dr. Kraft did not deny that the connection
might be direct (by way of intentional transmission, as well as
by way of later perception), but argued that there is not enough
evidence from the generations that fall between these two time
periods to give us sufficient detail regarding the exact
relationship of early Pharisaic to later classical/rabbinic
Judaism. The dynamics of historical development are unclear.
Some Discussion on Recent DSS Controveries
==========================================
Barbara Thiering's Jesus and the Riddle of the Dead Sea
Scrolls> (Harper-Collins 1992) is a book that identifies John
the Baptist as the Teacher of Righteousness and Jesus as the
Wicked Priest of the Qumran texts. She claims that scrolls were
written by very early, selfconsciously Christian authors who have
coded their writings. Thiering also claims that she has broken
this alleged code. Dr. Kraft feels that the class should now
have enough background information to read this book
intelligently and objectively. [For a readable summary and
review, see Hershel Shanks in BAR 18.5 (Sept/Oct 1992) 69f.]
Another recent controversial book may be even more seductive than
Thiering's. It is written by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh
and is entitled The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception> (Summit
1991). In the first part of the book, a lot of interesting and
valuable information is given. However, as the title suggests,
the book then goes off and ventures into some eccentric arguments
and theories that have little or no evidential support.
//end dss.950302//
DSS.950314(=#15) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 14 March 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert A. Kraft
Cara Weinstein, recorder; Lisa Bronowitz, editor
Business: We discussed a few basic features of the CD-ROM as a source
for particular types of material and pieces of information:
1. Files are identified as such: ".txt" == text file
".pct" == picture file
".qt" == movie file
(stands for "quick time")
Each file type is accessed by a different type of software --
text by almost any wordprocessing or text display program,
"*.pct" by graphics displayers that handle PICT files,
"*.qt" by software that can show motion clips.
(See the instructions sent with the first installment of the index.)
2. Sample file name: d:\text\a000[0]040.txt (brackets mine)
The number in brackets denotes the type of visual that will appear:
0 = informational text, 1 = picture (various sorts),
3 = picture of (portion of) a scroll, 4 = English translation of "3"
More business: Those who have not yet submitted their reviews should do
so. Book Store report: The Book Store claims to have copies of Gaster,
Vermes, and Garcia Martinez. Also, RAK has reordered VanderKam and
Fitzmyer through the Book Store.
For reference: RAK will refer to Garcia Martinez in the future as GM.
Assignment: For next class, read the "Rule of the Community" = "Manual of
Discipline" from cave 1 (1QS), and after that look at the fragments from
caves 4 and 5 (which come next in GM). Note that GM does not attempt to
synthesize the various fragments into one text, but does provide some
cross-referencing to assist the reader. After 1QS (etc.), we will move on
to the Damascus Document (CDC or CD).
We passed around pictures of some of the scrolls, including the Habbakuk
commentary and the Manual of Disciple. A few interesting things can be
noted in the pictures: Inter-linear corrections can be seen in some of the
photos -- most likely comments and interpretations (the copiers and/or
users of some of the scrolls apparently took the liberty to make such
corrections/comments after the scrolls were written). Also, stitch marks
can be seen joining some of the columns. This is logical, as an animal of
normal size would be hard pressed (no pun intended) to provide a
sufficiently lengthy continuous piece of hide on which to write. Lastly, a
couple of (to us) mysterious symbols, which one contemporary investigator
would have us believe may be "Chinese" (a theory not widely embraced) are
found in the margins of 1QS.
Discussion of the comparison of the cave 4 fragments of the Manual to the
more complete copy from cave 1:
Dating based on handwriting analysis (paleography) suggests that at least
some of the cave 4 fragments of the "Manual" are from the "Herodian
period" (refers to Herod and his successors, in the last third of the
first century BCE into the first century CE). This would place them
within the last century or so in which Qumran was occupied. In contrast,
the cave 1 manuscript has been dated to the "Hasmonean period," prior to
about 63 BCE. Thus it may be possible to catch a glimpse of some
adjustments and modifications taking place among the users of the much
copied "Manual" materials.
Parallelism, which is typical of early Israelite poetry, is apparent in
the language of much of the poetry at the end of 1QS --
ideas/constructions are repeated or echoed in contiguous or nearby lines,
such as: "I shall bless his name / I shall extol him." Some themes that
appear frequently in 1QS include relationship to God's "covenant," ideals
and requirements for daily living, eschatological world view, and the
struggle with satanic forces ("Belial").
After this background discussion, we read aloud the first 15 lines of the
the Manual, a section called "Introduction" by Fitzmyer. Notice the
particular terms used for the attributes of the people of the Community:
"righteous," etc. RAK noted out that in examination of the scrolls,
interpreters viewing things from traditional Jewish perspectives have
tended to have their attention drawn initially to the concrete terminology
denoting law and/or obedience, whereas those operating from traditionally
Christian perspectives tend to notice more quickly the more abstract
ideals such as "justice" and "grace." Both aspects seem clearly present.
To keep in mind: the first thing to do is to try to get an overview of the
entire text. What does it seem to be trying to accomplish? What is the
literary "form" chosen for the task? (Note that poetic "form" does not
necessarily manifest itself in an obvious pattern of writing -- the lines
can be run together in the same manner as narrative, and the poetic
qualities only become apparent by analysis of the contents; this can be
seen at the end of 1QS.)
//end minutes dss.950314//
DSS.950316(=#16) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 16 March 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert A. Kraft
Recorded by Arthur Cho and Tal Golob (born 3/21!)
Pre-Class:
The Treasure of the Copper Scroll> by John Marco Allegro is an
interesting book on these unique, metallic plaques. Dr. Kraft has a copy
for those who are interested in looking at it. Also, an article from the
Feb. 19 Philadelphia Inquirer on DNA tests on the DSS was introduced and
Kraft has a copy of this also. Finally, for the undergrads and graduates
who are need of financial support, a directory of scholarships from
inside and outside the University is available from the General Honors
office.
Class itself:
Dr. Kraft immediately began to delve into the Manual of Discipline (Rule
of the Community; 1QS) of the DSS translation. The thirty day punishment
for giggling caused a titter among the classmembers and a brief, sarcastic
discussion. Kraft brought us to order by asking the question, "Who is
this document (the Manual of Discipline) about?" Common names used in the
text for the main participants included "the Many," "the Community," "the
sons of Zadok" and "the sons of Aaron." The relative importance and
relationship of such designations raises question how the actual
addressees of the "Manual" saw themselves and the authority structures
around them. Did they see themselves actually as "the sons of Zadok"
(with the priestly historical connections of such terminology), for
example, or was the phrase used in a more symbolic manner, detoured from
its historical roots. Kraft stressed that awareness of this sort of
distinction is important, even when no clear answer can be found.
Discussion continued about who "the sons of Zadok" and "the sons of Aaron"
might be, in this context, whether one or both terms refer to the
community as a whole or rather to specific members (subgroups) of the
community. Kraft noted that the name "Zadok" is historically connected to
an important priestly leader alongside the famous political leader, King
David, around the year 1000 BCE. The possible conflict between the
Hasmoneon priest/kings, who apparently could not literally claim
"Zadokite" priestly lineage, and the DSS community was reiterated. After
reading from the translation, col. 5 line 2, the context points to the
priests of the community to be "the sons of Zadok," as distinct from the
"the many." "The sons of Aaron," are described similarly, and the class
decided these names were not used to describe the entire DSS community but
only (some of?) the priestly leaders.
It was further discussed how the use of the name, "sons of Zadok," may
reflect the DSS people's view of Jerusalem and the Temple cultus. This
topic was returned to later in the class. Discussion of the "Levites" was
postponed for the present.
The question of the flow and organization of 1QS led to a detailed
discussion of the possible significance of the blanks and other possible
"pointers" left in the texts. These blanks are indicated in the GM
translation with the italicized word "blank." Kraft clarified (again
showing the photofacsimiles) that these blanks are regions where the
scribe did not write, leaving blank spaces in the text, rather than
referring to portions of the text that are mutilated or missing. Kraft
pointed to an interesting place where blanks were used right after the
famous reference to the two messiahs, "of Aaron and Israel" (9.11) -- does
the presence of an apparent break in the text at this point have any
special significance?
More about the special markings in GM: Blanks are indicated by "blank"(in
italics), holes or gaps in the text by [...], superscript writing is
enclosed between /.../, and erasures within pointed brackets thus {...}.
Discussion of erasures, regions of the text where something was written
but later erased and are now unreadable for translation purposes, ensued.
The sheer number of times erasures appear in the text is interesting in
itself and raises the question of the extent to which changes in the
community's perception and application of its rules could be traced in
these materials.
Discussion continued about the mysterious "Chinese" symbol noted in the
previous class, in the margin between 8.3 and 9.3 (see also a similarly
elaborate symbol between the last lines of cols 6 and 7). (The
significance of other, more simple marginal symbols was also discussed.)
Someone suggested that it might be a signature by the scribe while others
postulated that it might be "doodling," or a mistake, or just blots of
ink. Kraft pointed out that clear strokes, some of which resemble other
simple marginal marks, are distinguishable. As noted in the earlier
minutes, a recent claim that the symbol is "Chinese" (representing "God")
has not found wide acceptance among experts. Also, the use of **** in the
text (at 8.14) to represent the tetragrammaton was briefly commented on --
the scroll itself actually has four dots here.
The question of the attitude to the Jerusalem Temple cultus was revived.
Column 9 of the text (1QS) portrays the scroll community as
non-sacrificing -- instead opting for offerings "of the lips," presumably
prayer and praise, and correct conduct. (An aside to this was raised
regarding GM's use of the literalistic translation "holy of holies" vs.
Vermes' "house of holiness" -- see 9.6 and 8.5-6. Kraft pointed out that
the cultic specifity of the term may also lend insight into how the scroll
people viewed themselves in relation to the Jerusalem Temple cultus and to
ideals of "purity" and "holiness"; the community is or becomes the true
"holy of holies.")
Tangent: The resonance of biblical phrases (e.g. plantation of Israel) can
be traced by using a biblical concordance. Some implications of this
resonance will be further discussed when we read para-biblical texts.
Even more tangental: The question was raised about the use of formulas
such as "as it is written. . .," in ancient texts without the quotation it
refers to being identifiable today. Kraft commented that this can happen
in the DSS as in other early literature (e.g. the Christian Gospel of
Matthew 2.23) where references may be made to texts that no longer exist.
We will even encounter references to books that can not be identified --
1QS 6.7 might be a case in point, while 1QSa (=1Q28a) 1.7 almost
certainly is.
Discussion of the focus on a perfected, everlasting "covenant" in 1QS 8.10
and elsewhere in the "Manual" led to comments on the possible connections
with the "new covenant" expectations in Jeremiah 31.31 and 32.40
("everlasting covenant"). Some early Christian interpreters also found
these texts to be congenial, and the Christian idea of a "new testament"
began as an attempt to apply the "new covenant" prediction to themselves
(later it came to designate the Christian scriptural collection).
//end minutes dss.950316//
DSS.950321(=#17) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 21 March 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Syri Jo Koelfgen, Inscriber; Vincent Liu, Examiner
And the Instructor (RAK: triagrammaton!) on this day of the Spring
Equinox called upon the Many to do what is good and just in his
presence (Manual of Discipline Column 1 line 2 = 1.2), i.e. remember
to put the proper heading at the top when writing class minutes!
It gives [triagrammaton] a headache to have to perform this evil,
which is not good.
Quasi-codices of Religious Studies course offerings for Fall Term 1995
were distributed to the Community, and the Instructor conveyed the
truth in all his knowledge that more will be available at a later time
in revised form.
A thin book by F.F. Bruce, the Instructor's first Overseer, was passed
around to the Many. Title: Biblical Exegesis in the Qumran Texts
(Tyndale Press, 1959). It exemplefies earlier studies on this much
discussed subject -- see the bibliography given on pp. 160f by Joseph
A. Fitzmyer, The DSS: Major Publications and Tools for Study (SBL
Resources for Biblical Study 20; Scholars Press, revised ed. 1990).
There will be a lecture on "Implications of the Dead Sea Scrolls: an
Update" by Prof. Edwin Yamauchi (Miami of Ohio University) on
Wednesday April 5th beginning at 1:00 in the faculty club. Ask Jim or
Brad (our ever-esteemed graduate companions) for more details.
Assignment for next class session: those who bravely enter into the
covenant on 23 March are to have read the Damascus Document, and also
to have examined the poetry fragment circulated by RAK, comparing it
to the hymn at the end of the Community Rule and asking if it might
itself be a product of a similar outlook.
The Rule, The Rule of the Community, The Manual of Discipline (1QS):
Sources to review:
1) Fitzmyer - Question 28. What is the Manual of Discipline?
2) VanderKam - pp. 57-58 b. Manual of Discipline --
see also: Rule of Blessings, Rule of the Congregation;
3) Garcia Martinez - The Rule of the Community pp. 3-32.
The Instructor reminded the Many that there can be errors in textbooks
(just as he is always making bloopers, and we as his humble students in
admiration of his knowledge mimic these mistakes).
An obvious "haplography" (writing only part of similarly worded
sections -- "half-written") appears in GM on p.6, where 1QS 3.19 is
completely omitted! The following was supplied as adapted from the
early translation by Millar Burrows: [19] In the abode of light are
the origins of truth, and from the source of darkness are the origins
of error. Less obvious but nonetheless confusing is the claim in
Fitzmyer that Wadi ed-Daliyeh, the site of the discovery of some
ancient "Samaritan" papyri, is "in Transjordan to the northeast of the
Dead Sea" (p.1), although cartographers seem to place it north and
slightly northwest of Jericho, not across the Jordan.
There also seems to be an error, or at least a misleading claim, in
VanderKam's section on the "Manual" (p.58), which states: "The full
manuscript from Cave 1 has two additional compositions ON it." Not!!
Or maybe, Not quite! It should say that the full manuscript from Cave
1 has two additional compositions ASSOCIATED WITH it. These two (1QSa
and 1QSb) seem to have been associated by scholars with 1QS on the
basis of content and probably format (and/or perhaps in terms of
handwriting as well). None of the other copies of "The Rule of the
Community" (1QS) include these works (they don't seem to have left
traces in the 11 or 12 other fragmentary manuscripts of the Manual of
Discipline from Caves 4 and 5). "The Rule of the Congregation" (1QSa,
which is also designated 1Q28a in the List of the Manuscripts from
Qumran - page 469 of GM) has an eschatological focus. "The Rule of the
Blessings" (1QSb or 1Q28b) contains blessings for some of the
community leaders. In his organization of the materials, GM separates
the appendix 1QSa (1Q28a) even farther from The Manual, in a section
on "literature with eschatological content" (126ff) because it
consists of regulations for the end times. The appendix 1QSb = 1Q28b
appears near the end GM's translation with other hymnic materials
(432f). It is not impossible that all three "Rules" originally
occupied the same leather roll, but that conclusion does not seem
obvious. If it is the case, translators such as GM do a disservice by
separating the pieces so radically!
After the Instructor introduced 1QSa and 1QSb to the Many, an Initiant
inquired, with all of his heart and with all of his soul, after the
true meaning of the distinction (in titles) between superscripts and
small letters. The Instructor therewith answered by taking an example
into account. Look at page 20 in Garcia Martinez:
4QRule of the Community\a/ (=4Q255[4Qpaps\a/]) and
4QRule of the Community\b/ (=4Q256[4QS\b/])
have the respective superscripts \a/ and \b/. The superscripts
indicate that the handwriting on different fragments is not the same,
so the fragments come from different copies of the same document (copy
superscript a, copy superscript b, copy superscript c, etc). The small
adjoined letters (as with 1QSa) indicate that on the basis of content
and/or perhaps format/handwriting it has been judged that the
respective fragments are related in some consecutive way (thus the
idea of 1QSa and 1QSb as "appendices").
It also should be noted that, among the 4QS materials, 4QpapS\a/
(also known as 4Q255) was given a coded designation to indicate that
these fragments are on pap(yrus) not on the usual leather writing
material. (See the description on GM 491 where upper case "S" is
correctly used, in contrast to lower case "s" on p. 20, but "pap" does
not appear!) Designations have changed over the years, but don't be
confused: 4QpapS\a/ is identical to 4Q255, which is identical to
"4QRule of the Community\a/."
During the previous class session we noticed various group terms used
in the Manual: the Community, the Many, the Levites, the sons of
Aaron, the sons of Zadok, etc., but we did not yet talk about micro-
organization, with reference to particular individuals (in the
structure of the community). Some examples are:
Examiner (6.12) [Hebrew mevaqqer>]
Inspector (6.20) [Hebrew mevaqqer>!]
Interpreter (8.12)
Instructor (9.12)
(note also twelve men and three priests in 8.1)
The class Instructor/Inspector then reminded the classroom Community
that in analysis of the micro-organization used in the Manual, the
student Examiner should ponder, "What are the tasks of these
individuals? How do they function in relation to each other and to the
larger group(s)?" It should be further taken into consideration that
these micro-organized individuals were in some ways authority figures,
and the student should attempt to determine what aspects of their
roles as defined in the Manual gave them this power.
Distinct examples and specific references were then explored:
Examiner (6.12) or Inspector (DD 13.7ff) [Gaster has "Overseer";
Hebrew mebaqqer/mevaqqer>]
Beginning in 6.11 with "And in the session of the Many no-one should
utter anything without the consent of the Many. And if the [6.12]
Examiner of the Many prevents someone having something to say to the
Many...." It can be suspected here that the Examiner is examining FOR
the Many (rather than examining the Many itself); that is, he is
exercising authority on their behalf by not allowing (or also
allowing?) someone to speak. The Many in this case seems distinct
from and inclusive of the "council." The whole community is being
spoken of -- probably all initiated members. It should be kept in
mind when looking at such passages that the same term (e.g. "Israel,"
and perhaps even "the Many") can sometimes be used in reference to two
distinguishable groups, so any such term without context can be
especially ambiguous (as in a fragmentary text). The Examiner appears
to be some sort of arbitrator (in a quasi-democratic situation?) who
determines who should speak in certain conditions. [As we shall see,
the Damascus Document provides more details on the functions of the
Examiner/Inspector (13.7-19, 14.8-12; note GM translates "Inspector"
here!), if we can assume a close relationship and consistent
terminology between it and 1QS.]
It should be noted that there may be circular antecedents of pronouns
in these texts -- one "he" may refer to one nearby antecedent, while
another "he" may mean another (there is always the possibility of a
switch in subjects). In 6.12, for example, it is confusing whether
the person in question is attempting to address the council or the
whole group. In 6.13 "the Many" could mean the council as
representing the entirety, or could be a reference to the whole
community. "Israel" in 6.13 almost certainly signifies a larger
population than "the Many." But the student cannot at this point be
completely sure how the subdivisions of the community are designated
and related. The "Council" can be designated as one subgroup, and a
bigger subdivision is the "Community" (which probably constitutes the
initiated members). In 6.13 it is emphasized that there is voluntary
association with this Community (people are not forced into being in
it) -- a theme found also elsewhere in 1QS. However, the idea of
volunteering is somewhat paradoxical in the context of the strong
belief also present in the DSS in the idea of predestination, that
each person fulfils his "lot."
Instructor (6.14) [Hebrew paqid>]
Begin with 6.13: "And to any in Israel who freely volunteers [6.14] to
enrol in the council of the Community, the Instructor who is at the
head of the Many shall test him with regard to his insight and his
deeds." "Insight" here may mean how the person volunteering handles
interpretation of scripture, and "deeds" most probably refers to the
conduct of the volunteer (i.e. does he sleep in class?). When
considering the word "Instructor" one should bear in mind the extent
to which the actual meaning of a word can, or cannot, be determined
from its etymological meaning -- here paqid> means something
like apointee, but with exactly what function(s) is problematic.
Vermes here renders it "guardian" and Gaster, "superintendent."
Fitzmyer (78f) has "deputy," and wants to equate this person with the
previously mentioned "overseer" (= examiner/inspector). Very
confusing. Professor Kraft continued story-time with 6.14: "If he [the
volunteer?] suits the discipline he [the Instructor?] shall introduce
him [6.15] into the covenant so that he can revert to the truth and
shun all sin...." This apparently alludes to the joining of the
community where a re-establishment of the ideal state is possible.
After this explanation was presented, one of the initiants thereupon
asked, "When it says 'revert to truth' is it talking about being
caught in sin?" Kraft then began to explain the story of Adam and Eve:
When God created Adam, he said, "I can do better," and thus Eve,
woman, was produced. Adam and Eve were created perfect, or at least
innocent, and the text may be a reference to the need to relate back
to the ideal state from which humankind has fallen. This desire to
"revert to truth" -- and to turn from the corruption of sin -- is the
community program as presented in 6.15.
Inspector/Examiner (6.20) [again, Hebrew mevaqqer>]
Begin 6.18: "When he has completed a year within the Community, the
Many will be questioned about his duties, concerning his insight and
his deeds in connection with the law. And if the lot results in him
[6.19] joining the foundations of the Community according to the
priests and the majority of the men of the covenant, his wealth and
his belongings will also be included at the hands of the [6.20]
Inspector of the belongings of the Many." Here there is a repetition
of the "insight" and "deeds" mentioned in 6.14. Here in 6.18, "he"
refers to (6.13) "any in Israel who freely volunteers [6.14] to enrol
in the council of the Community." There is mention of a "lot"
whereby the Many decide if he can stay in the Community. This "lot"
could be directly associated with the idea of one's predestined status
being revealed (see the detailed "horoscope" texts from the DSS), or
may simply refer to an act of drawing straws or throwing dice or even
voting (the results of which could, of course, be interpreted as
predestined). The lot was basically a judgment of inclusion or
exclusion. The Inspector can be seen here functioning as the
"treasurer" of the Community, although not necessarily only in the
monetary sense -- he seems to be the one in charge of possessions,
the collector of goods, and/or the distributor. Is the the same person
as mentioned with this title in 6.12?
Interpreter (8.12) [Gaster, "Expositor"; Hebrew doresh>]
In 8.4 "When these things exist in Israel [8.5] the Community council
shall be founded on truth..." -- it is introduced here that the larger
context is "in Israel." Now begin 8.10: "When these have been
established in the foundation of the Community for two full years /in/
perfect behaviour [8.11] /they will be segregated/ (like) holy ones in
the midst of the council of the men of the Community. And every
matter hidden from Israel but which has been found out by [8.12] the
Interpreter, he should not keep hidden from them for fear of a spirit
of desertion." The Interpreter should not keep the things he has
found out hidden from the segregated ones -- or perhaps from Israel --
lest a "spirit of desertion" overcome them and distance them from the
truth the community offers. Continuing in 8.12: "And when these exist
/as a community/ in Israel [8.13] /in compliance with these
arrangements/ they are to be segregated from within the dwelling of
the men of sin to walk to the desert in order to open there His path.
[8.14] As it is written [Isa 40.3]: 'In the desert, prepare the way of
****, straighten in the steppe a roadway for our God.'" The idea is
to rescue these from the "men of sin." The Interpreter probably
interprets what the community considers to be "scriptural" works,
such as the passage here from Isaiah. The Interpreter possibly
was supposed to produce "pesherim" (commentaries, of a sort) and
publicly distribute (publish) this material to bring those
who seek perfection into the righteous community of God -- "the path
of the desert." Is the reference to desert a reference to actual
desolation (wilderness) or is it symbolic as a contrast between truth
and falsity, good and evil, apples and oranges, etc.? In 8.16, it
should be kept in mind that the word "prophets" can be a misleading
term. Josephus uses the word "prophet" not only to describe the
prophets of old, but also to describe more recent persons such as John
Hyrcanus, and indeed, in a sense, himself. Josephus viewed Hyrcanus
as a king, a priest, and a prophet. This and similar evidence from
that period indicates that there can be some ambiguity to the use of
the term "prophet," and we need to avoid jumping to conclusions before
all the evidence can be viewed.
After having discussed these titles/roles, our leader embarked to page
126 of Garcia Martinez to look more closely at 1Q28a = 1QSa, The Rule
of the Congregation in the last times. It talks about the rules of the
community of Israel in the final days. Note: the title the "sons of
Zadok" is almost always followed by "the priests" in the texts we have
examined so far, and thus probably "the sons of Zadok, the priests"
(1.2) is the fuller standard designation. This passage tells of the
(1.2) "men of the covenant who have turn[ed away from the pa]th [1.3]
of the people." This "path" represents evil, whereas the "covenant"
represents righteousness. The idea is that the "congregation" has
been kept away from serving in sinful/wicked ways and walks in
moral/righteous ways. In 1.6 "armies of the congregation" are
introduced, which could allude to what we will encounter in the War
Scroll. It is unknown as to what the book of HAGY (HAGU) in 1.7
refers [we will encounter it again in the Damascus Document]. 1Q28a
then refers to the responsibilities and restrictions associated with
different ages in the community -- e.g. a boy may not (1.9)
"[approach] [1.10] a woman to know her through carnal intercourse
until he is fully twenty years old." In 1.11 it states "Then she
shall be received to give witness against him..." Who is she? The
woman? The book HAGY? Both Vermes and Gaster translate this "she" as
"he." Hmmmm. Kinda makes you wonder.
The Interpreter in all of his glory then commanded the Many to read
the rest of 1QSa for next time, in addition to reading the Damascus
Document. Amen, Amen.
//end minutes dss.950321//
DSS.950323(=#18) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 28 March 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
[[missing]]
//end minutes dss.950323//
DSS.950328(=#19) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 28 March 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorder: Matt Gerber, checked by David N. Slarskey
1. Pre-Class
Class began with an article from that day's NY Times "Science Times"
being passed around. The article dealt with the use of DNA testing at
Birmingham Young University to help reconstruct Dead Sea Scrolls
fragments. It is able to do this by determining whether the different
fragments are from the same animal hide.
Following this there was a brief discussion of the DSS CD-ROMs (yes,
they're still in MMETS, but the Library copy can be borrowed).
2. Cleanup Questions
Q: When are paper topics due?
A: E-mail Dr. Kraft as soon as you have an idea what you want to do.
Q: When are finished papers due?
A: The last day of class, ideally.
Q: How is the instructor coming along with the reviews?
A: They're still "in process"; But fear not, all will be released for
public consumption at some point!
3. The Damascus Document (abbreviated as "DD")
As we have already seen with the "Manual," there is good evidence that
there was a great deal of revising done to some of the more popular
scrolls (those for which we have many copies). Since this indicates
that at least some of the scrolls evolved into their currently
preserved forms, we must always be aware of the difficulty of knowing
what the original (or even the earliest recoverable) version said and
why subsequent copies may have been modified? In most instances we
don't yet have enough information to be able to answer this question,
and probably never will have enough. What we can be fairly sure of is
that what we have now is not necessarily what was originally written.
So far, the Damascus Document has only been found in two places --
the DSS and the Cairo geniza. It would not be surprising, however, if
it were to be found to be quoted or referred to in Syriac or Arabic or
other ancient or "medieval" sources. This is because there is so much
material out there that just hasn't been looked at yet from the
perspective of DSS scholarship, partly because there aren't enough
trained scholars or financial support for such undertakings.
The Cairo geniza fragments of DD overlap with each other (Cairo A,
column 8 parallels Cairo B, "column 19") and show some variations in
the material that they have in common. When the ten DSS fragmentary
manuscripts and their overlaps with themselves are compared with the
much more recent Cairo materials (10th and 12th centuries ce), the
following general reconstruction of "the larger DD tradition" emerges:
-Hitherto unknown material preceding the start of Cairo fragment A;
-Cairo A columns 1-8, with overlap at the end from Cairo B;
-Cairo B ("columns 19-20");
-Some hitherto unknown material from the DSS fragments;
-Cairo A columns 15-16 (somehow out of order in the fragment?);
-Cairo A columns 9-14 (again, misordered in the fragment?);
-Hiterto unknown material after the end of the Cairo fragments.
One key to understanding both the Damascus Document and the Manual of
Discipline is addressing the question "How did these people/authors
see the world they were living in, their role in it, the forces acting
on them, and their history (which included both their interpretation
of their past and whether or not they saw a future)?". In other
words, we need to recreate the self-identity of the two documents to
determine the context(s) in which they were written, and the authors'
friends, foes, and goals.
One such area of self-identification involves the relationship to the
Jerusalem Temple, its leadership, rituals, and significance. DD has
many more explicit references to these matters than does the Manual of
Discipline, which makes only passing and general allusions to the
Temple. Some have argued that the DD advocates stripping religion
down to its basics & getting rid of the ruling Temple regieme. Others
counter, however, that the author(s) of DD aim to substitute a
different order of their own, as a purified Temple.
How is this alternate leadership construed? In DD 14.3ff the insiders are
described as priests, levites, children of Israel ("the Many"?), and
"the proselyte." A learned priest heads the community (and/or each
"camp"), and an "Inspector" (mevaqqer) is very important as well (see
also DD 13.2ff for similar structures). The community has its "judges"
(DD 10.4ff), also associated with priests and levites, and its halakic
rites and rituals.
By definition in the ancient world, a priest was someone who was a
functionary in a temple. This raises the question: "What were the
roles of the priests for these Temple-less communities?" Keep this
question in mind as you read more of the preserved materials.
At the end of class, we took a quick look at DD 3.12 - 4.4. Here,
the author(s) of the DD maintain that God has revealed secrets to
those who hold the truth (thus suggesting an "apocalyptic"
perspective). This section also introduces an example of self-
referencing interpretation of scripture (in this instance, also using
Temple language drawn from Ezek 44.15) which is so basic to much of
the DD and takes on its own literary form in the DSS "pesharim"
(commentaries) fragments.
4. Assignment
For next class, be prepared to discuss the DD attitudes to the Temple
and its functions and read the War Scroll and the Temple Scroll.
//end minutes dss.950328//
DSS.950330(=#20) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 30 March 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorded by Christine Boulos and Syri Koelfgen
1. Administrative and Preliminary Matters
(1) According to Jim B., Oh Esteemed Grad Student, there will be a
lecture open to all interested on April 5 by Professor Edwin Yamauchi
of Miami University (Ohio) at 1 pm in the Faculty Club. The lunch
preceding the lecture is only open to grad students and faculty.
Yamauchi will discuss the significance of the scrolls in relation to
early Christianity.
(2) Negotiations are underway to arrange a lecture by "cult hero"
Lawrence Schiffman, possibly in the second week of April.
2. Damascus Document (DD) Continued: Questions for the Class
(1) In what ways is the community described?
Note that the term "Israel" is used to refer to the special community
(e.g. DD 3.13, 12.8; see also 1.4-5, 12.8) and also to the larger body
out of which that remnant "converts" (e.g. DD 1.3, 2.9, 3.14, 7.12-18;
see also 3.19, 4.2-4, 8.16). Even within the community, "Israel" can
refer to a subset (DD 10.5, distinguished from those of Levi and
Aaron; see also 14.4) of the pure and righteous, who keep the
covenant correctly. Other general titles used include "the Many" (e.g.
DD 14.7, 14.12, 14.17; not as frequent as in the Manual!), and
reference is made to organization by "camps" (e.g. DD 7.6, 12.20-
14.12).
Various titles are given to leaders, which sometimes may refer to an
individual priest (e.g. DD 13.2), or a righteous teacher (e.g. DD
1.11, 6.11, 20.1-32), or a messiah (e.g. DD 19.10f, 20.1), or to
groups of "judges" (DD 10.4ff) including priests and levites, or to a
general council (e.g. DD 20.24f; compare Manual 8.1, with 12 men and 3
priests!).
(2) Of what sort of socio-political climate is the author aware?
"Damascus" is a location (geographically north of Jerusalem) that is
connected to the community's perceived history (e.g. DD 6.5). It is
also part of the exegetical self-referential language drawn from the
author's scriptures (Amos 5.26f in DD 7.14ff). It is where the
righteous "converts" entered the "new covenant" (DD 6.19, 7.21=19.14),
although not all remained faithful (DD 19.14). Whether there is any
intention of connecting literally to "Damascus" is unclear, but the
ideas of separating from "Judah" and moving "north" reflect the
history of ancient Israel and are clearly in the author's
consciousness (see DD 7.10-8.21, etc.) with reference to the larger
world around him, and the roots of his community. In DD, "Judah" often
has a negative significance, and the contrast between Judah and
Israel, south and north, is part of the scriptural heritage with which
our author works.
With regard to the larger world, on the fringes of the main focus of
"Israelite" traditions, our author alludes to "kings of the peoples"
and the "kings of Greece" (DD 8.10f), and knows of "proselytes"
(outsiders who join; DD 14.4, although it is not clear that they would
necessarily be non-Jews), and apparently of "gentiles" with whom
community members might come into contact (DD 12.6). But at this
point, these are fairly incidental references.
DIGRESSION --
An interesting example of how the author sometimes cleverly plays on
the ambiguity of certain words and passages is the reference to
"Sikkut" and "Sukkat" in DD 7.14-16. The unpointed Hebrew text is
identical for these two terms, but the editor has supplied different
vowels. Why? "Sikkut" is found in the Amos 5.26 passage quoted in DD,
while "Sukkat" is found in the Amos 9.11 passage, also quoted. Thus he
brings these two passages together, through the ambiguous word, and
applies them to his situation: Sikkut/Sukkat refers to the laws that
have "fallen" from use and need to be restored by the righteous
assembly. The community affirms that the law is the center of their
lives, placed on a plinth (or platform, identified with "the books of
the prophets" from which the quotations are taken!). Kraft reminded
the class that the original text of the scrolls does not contain
quotation marks (or for that matter, punctuation or distinctions
between upper and lower case letters), but they are added in the
translation so that readers can distinguish between quoted materials
and normal text.
(3) To further understand how these people saw themselves we began
with 8.8-12 where two bothersome biblical varmints (serpent, asp) are
interpreted as two sets of unfriendly kings. A question arose about
who Seth was (DD 7.21 "all the sons of Seth" are to be destroyed;
note that the overlapping section in DD 19.12 lacks this reference,
but it is found in the 4Q267 parallel section). Kraft began answering
the question at the beginning, with the garden of Eden tradition, by
defining the names Adam and Eve. Adam can be a personal name (Adam
Schaffer) or a term for "humanity," while Eve means life-giver or
agent of life. Together, Adam and Eve had two children, Cain and Abel.
As a result of the jealousy Cain felt toward his brother, he killed
Abel and was ostracized and marked evil by God. Now, since Abel, who
was to be the progenitor of the godly line, was dead, Seth was born
(Gen 4.25, 5.3) to continue that good line. The notorious passage in
Genesis 6.1-4 when the "sons of God" shack up with earthly women and
giants are born has sometimes been taken as a reference to the "sons
of Seth" (as God's children). In early Christianity, there were even
some groups that were called "Sethians," and who apparently held Seth
in high esteem. But in DD 7.21 the reference to the sons of Seth seems
to be to wicked people, whom the "prince of the congregation" will
destroy, presumably to Israelites who do not "convert" to the truth,
or perhaps to the fallen "Watchers" mentioned in DD 2.17-21, who are
deserving of judgment. In any event, the Seth passage seems to allude
back to the earlier judgment reported in DD 7.13, where the renegades
(in the separation of "the two houses of Israel," Ephraim and Judah)
are delivered to the sword (presumably in the historical events of 721
bce). The question arises regarding who is being delivered and who
remains to escape. The renegades delivered to the sword may be Judah,
as explained in the section that follows in DD. (Note that the
overlapping section of the second Cairo manuscript of DD is very
different throughout this difficult passage; see DD 19.)
(4) More on how the term "Judah" is used and an explanation of the
association between the Temple and Jerusalem:
In DD 8.2ff, "the princes of Judah" clearly has a negative connotation
-- God will vent his rage on them as wicked and traitors. It should
be kept in mind that the Damascus Document was copied and preserved
during the time of the Karaites when the internal Jewish struggles
between Karaites (rebellious "readers" of scripture) and Rabbinates
(the main stream at the time, defenders of living tradition) were
underway. Therefore, the copyist may have made changes in the
original to fit the polemic ideas of that later time. The fragments of
this passage from 4Q267 (GM p.51b) do not seem to include the "princes
of Judah" passage, which is in both DD 8.2ff and DD 19.15ff, but in
slightly different forms.
Jerusalem is the location of "the Temple" for most Jews in the DSS
period, and the body of overlapping terms such as Zion, the sanctuary,
the holy of holies, etc., needs to be kept in view. There are other
temples associated with Jews and Jewish history, but they would
normally be specified as such (e.g. Elephantine, Heliopolis, Gerizim).
We found some passing Temple references in the Manual of Discipline,
with the community taking the place of the holy of holies (1QS 8.5f,
9.6) and sacrifice depicted as "an offering of the lips" rather than a
literal act of burnt flesh. In the Damascus Document, the many
references to the sanctuary, to the priestly rituals, and to the
Temple as such may be intended as a preview of an idealistic state
that is not yet in existence (the purfied Temple) or it may be based
on the references to the historical Temple of the past as found in the
scriptures and/or traditions (before it became corrupted?). Another
possibility is that the references in the Damascus Document may be of
an ambivalent nature, where the community felt it could still have
something to do with the present Temple and its rites. This
illustrates how the attitudes towards the Temple may differ from
document to document. Always test your assumptions!
(5) Explanations for the origins of evil vary early Jewish sources:
-The passage in DD 2.17ff about the fallen "Watchers" reflects the
traditions found in the Enoch corpus (compare Gen 6.1-4), where the
origins of sinfulness are associated with those activites of the
"angels."
-The Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs also build on the fallen
"Watchers" tradition, and we have fragments of this work among the
DSS, attesting the widespread availability of this explanation.
-The traditional biblical story of Adam, Eve, and the Serpent in the
garden provides another explanation of the origin of human sin. Watch
for any references to this tradition in the DSS.
3. Closing Remarks and Directives:
In order to investigate the range of non-human agents, such as Belial,
in the DSS, it may be convenient to refer to Gaster's analytical
index, Section F in the revised edition, under "Angelology" (including
the DD 20.8 "Holy Ones" and the Manual 3.20 [DD 5.18] "Prince of
Lights" and DD 16.5 "Mastema"). Also look under Belial and his forces
in Gaster's section D.1, p. 557.
//end minutes dss.950330//
DSS.950404(=#21) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 4 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Jake Jaffe, Inscriber; Reuben Wetherbee, Examiner
1. Announcements and Preliminaries:
The Yamauchi lecture is on Wed April 5 at 1:00 PM in the Faculty Club.
If someone will take notes, we can post a summary.
RAK passed around a copy of Larry Schiffman's new book, Reclaiming
the DSS> (Jewish Publication Society 1994) which is weighty (in
content and bulk) and in addition to its many valuable features has
"many good pictures."
1.1 Handouts:
RAK passed out Fitzmyer's outlines for the Temple and the War scrolls
for all to have, except that he accidently didn't make enough copies,
so he made all his grad students donate theirs so that the
undergradutate thirst for knowledge could be sated. Jake was caught
hoarding outlines and forced to turn his extra copy over.
1.2 Schedule for remainder of course:
For the immediate future, we will concern ourselves with the War
Scroll (GM 95-125), the Temple Scroll (GM 154-184), and the Hodayot
(Hymns, Thanksgiving Praises; GM 317-370).
*NEW* For the remainder of the term, the assignments are:
11 April -- "other eschatological" works (GM 126-138)
13 April -- "exegetical" texts (GM 185-216)
18 April -- "para-biblical" materials (GM 219-237, 260-296)
20 April -- "halakhic" items, including 4QMMT (GM 77-92)
[24 April, probably, Schiffman visit]
25 April -- "poetic" materials (GM 371-403)
27 April (the last day!) -- "liturgical, calendric," etc. (GM 407-463)
You will, of course, have worked through these materials for your
papers, which are technically due at the end of the "reading days" --
at the very least, send in a page with your title and preliminary
observations by 4 May. Electronic submissions are requested (which
means that you need to think about how to produce appropriate "text
only" electronoscripts). The best studies will be circulated on the
DSS electronic list.
1.3 Preliminary Question:
"Why were Cave 1 materials so well preserved compared to other cave
materials?" Possible factors include:
-Cave 1 scrolls had been wrapped in linen and placed in jars in
antiquity, and were not simply "loose" as seems to have been the
situation in caves 4 and 11, for example. The relatively less
protected materials were all the more subject to all sorts of
"natural" processes of decay and degeneration (including layers of bat
dung) from which the relatively protected materials in cave 1 were
shielded. [ADDED NOTE: By the time cave 1 was discovered, some of the
jars probably had been broken by various means (earthquake, animals,
etc.); here is a relevant paragraph from Millar Burrows' 1955 account
in The DSS> (Viking Press) -- "Whenever and however the discovery
came about, the cave, when first entered, contained several jars, most
of them broken, with pieces of many others. Protruding from the broken
jars were scrolls of leather wrapped in linen cloth. They were very
brittle and rather badly decomposed, especially at the ends, but it
was possible to see that they were inscribed in a strange writing"
(p.5, apparently based on the accounts of the bedouin discoverers). A
comparable account of caves 4 and 11 would be instructive.]
-This raises the interesting question whether the functions of the
caves might have been different in antiquity: might cave 4 have been a
genizah-like resting place for already damaged scrolls, for example,
especially in view of the multiplicity of different documents and
copies evidenced there (several hundred!).
-A related issue is the extent to which the bedouin discoverers
contributed to the damage and loss; we hear horror tales of how
other discoveries of papyrus ended in some of the material being used
as fuel or incense (note that the earliest DSS discoveries were taken
to Kando since it was thought that the leather might be of value to
his trade in leather goods!); the problem of how much care was
exercised in the removal of the DSS materials from relatively
inaccessible locations by the untrained discoverers may also have been
a significant factor.
1.4 Roman Numerals are the work of Belial (another typo in GM):
The header at the top of page 104 in GM
Is printed: 1QM X 12-10
Should read: 1QM XI 2-10
1.5 Other Clean-up Matters:
The word mevaqaar> has been multiply translated by GM as both
the "Examiner" and the "Inspector" (1QS 6.12 and 6.20). The debate
still rages whether these are two separate people or just the duties
of a single person. Gaster complicates things by translating it
several ways, including examiner, guardian, and overseer while
rendering the Hebrew word paqid> as inspector. Both words may
have a relation to the greek word episkopos> (=overseer,
bishop), as this is offered as a translation for both Hebrew terms in
ancient translations of Jewish scriptures (LXX/OG = Septuagint/Old
Greek translations). Some commentators have seen here a possible link
between the writers of the scrolls and early Christianity.
Comparison of use of "locators" in English translations:
-Vermes provides column #s but no line #s, and his own paragraphing;
-Gaster gives col.line indicators for his major "thought groupings";
-Garcia Martinez is the most complete and careful to date, with
columns and lines noted along with other replicated features of the
originals (such as blank spaces or lines, corrections, etc.), but even
GM is still missing some significant fragments, including 4Q225
(4QpsJub\a/) with its reference to the wicked angel Mastema (see DD
16.5).
2. Discussion focus: THE WAR SCROLL
2.1 Preliminaries:
Note on a Spanish to English typo:
"Sion" is the Spanish spelling of Zion and the conversion of the "S" to a
"Z" seems to have been missed at least in War 12.13 (compare 19.5!) in
the translation of GM's Spanish version into the English edition.
The poor vs. the Poor (evionim/ebionim>; another example of
the effect of editorial choices):
Does this frequently used term refer to impoverished people or is it
(at least sometimes) a term of selfidentification in the community
(similar to "the Many")? GM repeatedly translates it with a lowercase
"p," which might suggest that he believes that it is used in a general
sense (although GM is not always consistent in such matters), but its
repeated use in standard phraseology suggests it may have a more
technical meaning (see e.g. War Scroll 11.9, 11.13, 13.14; see also
pesher Habakkuk 12.3-10, and pesher Psalm37 2.10, 3.10). Note that an
early Christian Jewish group was called the "Ebionites," reflecting
the same Hebrew term.
GM's Presentation of the War Scroll:
1. Main copy from cave 1
2. Fragments from cave 4
3. Other "texts connected with the War Scroll" (pp. 123-125) --
It should be noted that the fragment at the bottom of p. 123 is
parallel to the fragment at the bottom of p. 124, although GM does not
note this in his presentation of the materials. Similarly, the
presence of "4QWords of Michael" (4Q529) in this section is
questionable. How is it connected with the War Scroll?
2.2 Some similarities of Terminology between the War Scroll and the
other texts we have read:
-"Sons of Light" vs. Sons of Darkness has echoes in DD 13.12-14
(inductees must be worthy of "the lot of life" and avoid contact with
"the sons of the pit") and is more clearly present in the Manual (e.g.
1.9, 3.13, 3.24 -- see further, Gaster's index, p. 550).
-The priests and the levites appear frequently in their leading roles
in the DD and Manual as well.
-The larger eschatological and otherworldly context, with extrahuman
allies and adversaries, good and bad angels, heavenly hosts, spirits,
Belial, and the like, is well attested in also in the DD and the
Manual. (Whether these people would distinguish it as "otherworldly"
is worth investigation and discussion.)
2.3 Some Notable Differences -- Geographical Concerns:
The War scroll definitely centers itself in Jerusalem, which was the
site of the Temple and the hub of both the "united kingdom" of David
and Solomon and the later "southern kingdom" of Judah. However,
Jerusalem may have its main value as a symbolic ideal for our writer,
and it is a common focus in other eschatological writings as well.
The apparent enmity between "Israel" (as the northern kingdom) and
Judah found in the DD is not evident here, and the War scroll states
that the "final" battle force will be drawn from ALL the twelve tribes
of Israel (as in descendants of the sons of Jacob, not solely from the
northern or the southern kingdoms; see 3.14).
David's kingdom of Israel was created around 1000 bce, and was
politically and geographically united until about 921 bce, when it
split into the northern "Israel" (aka Ephraim, Joseph, or Jacob) and
the southern "Judah," from which the terms Jew and Judaism derive.
By the time the DSS look back on this history, the Samaritans were
also part of the mix, as survivors from ancient Israel, located just
north of Jerusalem in Samaria (their temple was on mount Gerizim).
Be on the lookout for possible references to this group in the DSS.
Jerusalem was the capital of the united Jewish kingdom, and then served
as the capital of Judah after the split, continuing the dynasty of David
until the Temple fell in 587-586 bce. The influence of the Davidic
tradition (either its presence or its absence) is another thing to
be alert to in studying the DSS.
Damascus was never part of the Israelite kingdoms, and is located
approximately 88 miles NNE if Jerusalem. The Damascus Document,
however, connects its community's history to the split of the "two
houses of Israel" (7.11-13 in Cairo A, but not in Cairo B). The
Manual of Discipline does not contain such a reference.
At this point in the class, the debate of who the "renegades" were
in DD 7.13ff (Cairo A) was rehashed (see last minutes for a full
overview), and the main points that came out of it were:
-the "fallen Sukkat of David" is interpreted as the "books of the
law," although a broader polemical tone might also be inferred;
-the "princes of Judah" were a negative entity in the DD;
-The previous point fits the evidence that the DSS community did not
look too favorably on the contemporary Temple establishment in
Jerusalem (4QMMT and other texts may prove relevant here).
The War Scroll has a much more positive outlook on the Kingdom of
Judah than that suggested in DD. Perhaps this refers to some ideal,
unified state stemming from a restoration of God's plan. The CD-ROM
claims that even all the Essenes together could not manage to wage a
war of the proportion described in the War Scroll in support of their
ideals (note the large numbers given in War descriptions).
Additionally, Philo stated that the Essenes themselves had nothing
to do with making weapons, but perhaps the conditions described in the
War Scroll are some special eschatalogical conditions in which the
Essenes would take up arms under divine instructions.
2.4 RAK's Suggestions for studying such "alien" materials:
-try to find analogies from your own experience or history to help to
understand these situations that are presented in the DSS;
-Do not get trapped into trying to create consistency in the
DSS. They may not have been consistent, even if they came from the
same community! Conduct an inductive investigation, especially citing
inconsistencies if you find them!
Is it possible that the DSS Community did not write the War Scroll?
RAK says: of course, almost anything is possible; they may have
obtained the Scroll from elsewhere for some reason, just as they had
biblical and other texts not of their own direct composition. We can
only make educated guesses, for this as for any of the DSS materials.
More Suggestions from RAK:
Try to envision the transmitters of the DSS as a living community
involved with many practical as well as theoretical concerns. How do
they perceive themselves in the actual world in which they must eat
and drink, survive hardships and illness, relate to each other, etc.,
as well as how they have developed their own special practices or
beliefs and the lifestyle associated with them? Imagine yourself as
part of their world. To what extent would the self-perception of
correctness mitigate other factors such as isolation and minority
status? Is there anything more important than being right?
2.5 The War Scroll and issues of fate/determinism/destiny:
-The references to "lots" (e.g. the lot of Belial, the lot of God's
people) continue to abound in the War Scroll, as in the Manual and DD.
E.g. War 1.1-5 refers to the general framework of conflicting "lots";
1.12-14 is more specific, and describes the 7 "lots" (destined
campaigns?) of the war where each side is triumphant 3 times, and then
God steps in and lifts the sons of light to victory the 7th time.
16.10ff Belial steps in to help the sons of darkness, perhaps in the
final "lot" period, and some of the "good guys" die in accord with
God's "mysteries." The priests and a "High Priest" rally the troops
for this encounter with the "crucible" of God to determine their fate
and ultimately God's victory, which is accomplished with aid from the
angel Michael on behalf of the "sons of the covenant" (War 16.10-
17.9).
The "crucible of God" imagery points to a final crisis time of
testing that will involve suffering on the part of the righteous; it
is described as one of the divine "mysteries," expected from ancient
times (see especially War 16.15-17.9; compare DD 20.3, which seems to
focus more on the individual judgment). What the relationship is to
the concept of the "messianic woes" or the "birthpangs of messiah"
known from other eschatological sources remains to be seen.
17.16 refers to the third lot (of Belial? the text is broken here),
apparently followed by the final confrontation, and the victory of
the forces of God, who thereby has kept his covenant (18.7-8).
//end minutes dss.950404//
DSS.950406(=#22) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 6 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Kim Noble, Primary Recorder; Matt Dworkin, Editor
Dr. James VanderKam, Professor of Hebrew Scriptures at Notre Dame
University, part of the expanded DSS team as of 1989, and author
of our text, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today> visited class
today. Dr. VanderKam wrote his dissertation on Jubilees at
Harvard under John Strugnell, and has also worked a great deal on
apocalyptic literature prior to his DSS days. Class was
conducted in an interview format, where students had the
opportunity to ask Dr. VanderKam any and all burning (or
smoldering) questions regarding the scrolls.
The chronology of the War Scroll.
In Column 2 of the War Scroll (1QM) the length of the
anticipated war is discussed (GM 96). The mathematics here
are not at all clear, as VanderKam (the book, 66) notes, but
probably should be read in light of the focus on "seven" found
throughout these materials, and especially the calendrical
emphases attested in many of the DSS texts, especially the Book
of Jubilees, which divides history into fourty-nine year cycles
(seven "weeks" of years constitute a "jubilee" -- see Leviticus
25.8ff) and at the end of time apparently a fifty-year cycle (see
Lev 25.10). VanderKam feels that despite the ambiguities of the
War Scroll text, the war was expected to be roughly forty years,
a number stated explicitly in the commentary to Psalm 37 (GM 203)
and in the Damascus Document 20.15 (GM 46) -- compare the
eschatological "seven weeks of years" mentioned in Daniel 9.25
and the figure 400 years found in the pseudepigrapical 4 Ezra
(also called 2 Esdras) 7.28; Jubilees 50.4 might also be
relevant here.
In line 6 of 1QM it states, "They shall arrange all /these/
during the appointed time of the year of release. During the
remaining thirty-three years of war..." Clearly, the war lasted
for more than thirty-three years. In line 8, the text refers to
the "years" of release, as opposed to the singular "year" above.
This is a period of rest from the war, a "sabbath of rest for
Israel." The first number problem occurs in line 9, when it
mentions the "thirty-five years of service." The subsequent math
is consistent as it goes on to state that the war will be
prepared for six years and fought during the remaining twenty-
nine (29+6=35). However, these figures are inconsistent with the
above mentioned thirty-three. The thirty-five year figure is
more consistent with the jubilee mini-cycle of seven years, as
thirty-five is divisible by seven. VanderKam followed Yadin in
assuming that fourty was probably the total figure in view (see
above); lacking evidence that this was achieved by adding seven
to the aforementioned "33," he looked more closely at the details
of the "35." He then pointed out that, if we assume six years of
war took place followed by one year of sabbatical, it is
inconsistent with the bottom of the column, where there appear to
be at least nine consecutive "years" of specific battles listed.
In addition, is this series intended to be sequential, or
distributed? It was pointed out that, since it states that there
were thirty-five years of "service," it is possible that the
ninth year refers not to the ninth consecutive year, but the
ninth year of explicit service. Dr. Kraft pointed out that since
7x6=42, if we eliminated the first year and the last period of
rest (or the final two years, which would include the last period
of rest), we can get the forty-year period we'd like which would
include 35 years of service (i.e. fighting) and 5 years of rest.
Unfortunately, we would have expected to find a total forty-nine
year period to fit in with the jubilee cycle (and with Daniel
9.25?).
While the number thirty-three could be obtained by subtracting a
seven-year period from forty, and twenty-nine can be obtained by
subtracting a six-year period from thirty-five, it seems
impossible to reconcile the two sets of numbers. In addition,
there are three different Hebrew words which were translated to
mean "preparation," none of which actually implies a sense of
"previousness." We are left at this point with many question
marks!
The number seven and the idea of a "jubilee" year.
The Book of Jubilees organizes its historical account in forty-
nine year units or "jubilees." The normal "biblical"
understanding based on Lev 25.10-12 is that the fiftieth year
after every cycle of seven sevens is called a jubilee year, when
slaves were to be released, and property returned to its original
owner -- a year of liberation and restoration. (Whether such a
system was ever actually observed is questionable.) However, in
Jubilees there seems to be another understanding that designates
the forty-nine year unit as a "jubilee" (presumably focusing on
its final year of rest in a special way) until fifty such cycles
have passed. After the fiftieth jubilee, a jubilee year is
proclaimed when the Israelite slaves are released, and the land
is returned to its owners, etc. Thus, what is expected to happen
on a micro level in a regular jubilee cycle based on Leviticus is
reflected only on a macro level in the fiftieth unit of the Book
of Jubilees (see 50.1-7).
What is the evidence that Jubilees (GM 238) was/was not authored
in the Qumran community? (See VanderKam 39f.)
It has been argued that it wasn't authored in the DSS community
because its author appears to still be operating in connection
with Israel as a whole, as opposed to representing a cut-off,
segregated community. However, just because he doesn't
explicitly mention a separate community doesn't mean he was not a
part of one. The first copy of Jubilees found in Cave 4 (4Q216)
preserves material from the first two chapters of the book. This
was dated by VanderKam to about 125 BCE, although Milik gave it
the earlier date of 150 BCE. In either case, it is almost certain
that Jubilees is older than this fragmentary copy, which means
that the book would be dated prior to the founding of the DSS
community. Although the "sectarians" probably didn't write it, it
is evident that the community admired the text greatly, since
with some fifteen copies found in caves 1,2,3,4 and 11, there are
more copies of Jubilees than of any other biblical books except
Psalms and Isaiah. Some argue that the similarities in outlook,
such as the solar calendar of 364 days, give evidence for
possible sectarian authorship. However, while Jubilees argues
that you may never use the moon in calculations of time, because
that is what the gentiles do, and because God structured the
universe in cycles of 364 days, which is divisible by seven, some
DSS calendars appear to have used lunar calculations.
Do we really have evidence of the New Testament in Cave 7? (See
VanderKam 166.)
According to O'Callahan, 7Q5 preserves parts of Mark 6. To make
his case, he needs to have two textual variations from the
normal texts of Mark in this sequence of twenty-eight letters,
which makes the idea of a match rather "chancy." However, part
of this sequence occurs nowhere else in Greek literature except
in Mark and in the Qumran fragment. Thus, while the argument is
not very strong, it is not entirely dismissible either. A more
reasonable approach to studying the New Testament would be to
study the parallels in eschatological ideology found in the texts
of the Qumran community and in those of early Christianity.
Did the books of Enoch originate with the DSS community? (See
VanderKam 37ff.)
Possibly, but parts of "Enoch" were probably written too early to
have originated with the sectarians. The oldest DSS fragment of
the Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72-82) was dated by Milik to about
200 BCE, which would clearly make it pre-Qumran. The Book of
Watchers (Enoch 1-36) has been dated to around the second century
BCE and the Book of Dreams (83-90) and the Epistle of
Enoch (91-107) probably soon after. Aramaic fragments of all of
these sections of the Enoch library appear among the DSS.
How do the sectarians relate to other contemporary Jewish groups?
The DSS people present themselves as traditionalists -- it was
everyone else who went astray -- although they appear to us as a
rift in the fabric of ancient Judaism. However, the Maccabees
were also a rift who became the establishment. Clearly, the
interpretation is very dependent on the historical results. The
Maccabean rift is analogous to that of the DSS sectarians;
however, the Qumranites disappeared while the Maccabees
flourished.
Our friend Larry Schiffman has made the point that the scrolls
contain a Sadducean approach to law. This shows that, in their
legal teachings, the DSS have some relationship to one of the
major streams of legal interpretation in the final centuries BCE.
It becomes confusing to call the scrolls "Sadducean" in terms of
the NT evidence about that group, although from a legal point of
view, it may be a valid identification.
Dr. VanderKam didn't want to venture into attempting to identity
the "Book of HAGY"; however, he did comment that Schiffman
believes it might be the Torah and Yadin thought it could be the
Temple Scroll.
Footnote to the "Scrolls Controversy."
When the controversy regarding the scrolls blew up in the BAR,
VanderKam became a spokesperson of the Society of Biblical
Literature (SBL), which drew up a statement regarding a policy on
what should happen if new finds were discovered. It encouraged
the discovering authorities to make their texts readily available
to anyone who wanted to study them. However, the American
School of Oriental Research (ASOR) thought that, given how much
money it takes to organize a dig, it seemed unfair that the
finder wouldn't have the first opportunity to examine (and
publish) his work. Finally a policy was enacted that gave rights
to the excavators, although they were encouraged to be open with
their findings.
The class expressed its warm appreciation for this stimulating
and largely fortuitous visit. A good time was had by all.
//end minutes dss.950406//
DSS.950411(=#23) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 11 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
[[missing]]
//end minutes dss.950411//
DSS.950413(=#24) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 13 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Glen Aduana and Clare Bayard
[[There are two ways: the dull and the lively. And it is a
mystery as to which works best for whom. In what follows, you
first have the straightforward, unimaginative record of class
#24. After that, you have the same material as the recorders
wanted to communicate it to their classmates. But you had to have
been there. And even then, who knows??! RAK]]
Cleanup Matters:
If possible, include author info in book review revisions.
Lawrence Schiffman will visit on Monday 24 April, 6:30, Room TBA.
Clemson class, currently in discussion stage, may have to be
conducted in MMETS, for technical reasons. Leonard Greenspoon to
discuss DSS biblical material.
The "Pesharim" or Commentaries
Discussed: five ways of referring to "scriptural" texts --
Explicit quotes (formulaic -- "it says")
Implicit quotes (verbatim text without introductory formula)
"Targumic" treatments (two degrees removed from complete
explicitness; "targum" means "translation/interpretation" and
becomes a technical term for translations of Hebrew texts to
Aramaic; here it refers to a close interpretative rendering)
Paraphrases (obviously related though not on a word by word basis)
Allusions
Fragments are sometimes classified by supposed content, as they
lack an appropriately comprehensive context.
The genre of the commentary involves a conscious attempt to
explain a given text. The DSS provided the first concrete
evidence of pre-Christian Semitic Judaic antecedents to the early
Christian practice of Commentary writing. Many types of
commentaries were discovered and received various designations,
including:
4QFlorilegium (Lat: bouquet, a flower-culling) provides a
collection of excerpts from presumably authoritative literature,
each followed by explicit interpretations in commentary format.
4QTestimonia, a collection of explicit quotations without
intervening comments, presumably chosen to "testify" to a
particular matter.
4QCatena (Lat: chain, fetter; see GM 209ff), a "chain" of quotes
with extensive interpretation, similar to 4QFlorilegium.
The "pesharim" (from pesher>, "it means")
---(Reminder about GM coding; see p. xxvi)---
[...] indicates a lacuna (gap, hole) in the MS
]...[ indicates the MS is preserved but illegible
(text)...(text) indicates an illegible portion in the preserved
materials
Also, GM's convention regarding the various attempts to
avoid using the tetragrammaton:
Paleo Hebrew form is rendered as YHWH, dotted form as ****
Normal Hebrew text is rendered as LORD
The Hebrew word EL> is translated as God
---
The Habbakuk Commentary, discovered in Cave 1, is the best
preserved commentary. It is especially useful since it gives us
an idea of the continuity of text.
The genre of commentary can be subdivided into those that deal
with consecutive text and those that are selective (as with the
Isaiah commentary).
Commentary indicators can also be formulaic: the word
pesher> is used sometimes by itself, sometimes in
combination with other constructions to introduce the
interpretation -- e.g. 1) "Interpretation of the Word,"
2) "It's interpretation," 3) "The interpretation concerns."
We also find simply "It says."
It is conceivable that these formulaic statements may be
characteristic of particular commentators, although the evidence
is too fragmentary at present to decide. Supporting evidence
might be the prevalence of phrases such as "easy interpretations"
in the commentary on Nahum.
Dr. Kraft notes that it is important to attempt to determine the
intent of the author, as indicated by the commentary's explicit
references, which can sometimes be tied into our hitorical
knowledge. He then went on to point out various examples of
allusions to persons or events from the history of Israel, such
as the reference to David's son Absalom.
Final Comments
Dr. Kraft informed us of the news report from Arizona that 18
more scroll fragments have been analyzed there with C14 dating
methods, and that the Habbakkuk Commentary was written on leather
from an animal that died between 150 to 5 BCE.
The next assignment:
18 April -- "para-biblical" materials (GM 219-237, 260-296)
//end minutes dss.950413 #1//
-----
[[Version #2; hold your hats!]]
DSS.950413(=#24) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 13 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Glen "Lovecraft" Aduana and Clare "Summoned into the Beyond"
Bayard, scribas
Minutes after the style of H.P. Lovecraft.
*
A series of unexplained disappearances -- my partner Clare, for
one...vanished.
Unexplained noises (was that really a fire engine outside today,
or was it... ...Belial?)
An evil that defies description...
and only B*B and his faithful Religious Studies 255 class of the
University of Pennsylvania stands between it and WORLD DOMINATION!
B*B versus CHTHULU>!
*
It was just another ordinary class...or was it?
B*B, the ever vigilant scholar, reminded us that if we should
find some information about the author (such as research
interests, or previously published work), to include it in our
revisions of the book reviews.
To prepare us for the climactic final battle, B*B reminded us
that:
The pesher concerning the arrival of Belial's arch lieutenant
Dagon was that Lawrence Schiffman will visit on Monday 24 April,
6:30, Room TBA.
and that the union between the Elder ones across the Mountains of
Madness is to be interpreted as our Clemson co-class, although
not yet fully planned, would possibly be conducted in MMETS via
satellite transmission; Leonard Greenspoon will discuss the
Qumran biblical material.
And as the skies grew black, and the air chilled with the force
of the Old One's arrival, B*B drew out that mystic text, The
Necronomicon, written by the mad Manichaean, Abdul al-Hazred
shortly before he was torn limb from limb by invisible forces
beyond his control. But B*B was clever, and disguised his copy
as Garcia Martinez' translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. With
the book in hand, he began reciting the mystic spells to banish
Chthulu from this world forever.
The mystic phrases fell into five categories: Explicit quotes,
which are definitely formulaic; implicit quotes; so called
"Targumic" quotes which are still definitely quotes, although two
degrees removed from complete explicitness, and not a paraphrase
(targum is actually a technical term for translations of Hebrew
texts to Aramaic; it means "interpret" or "translate");
paraphrases, which are obviously connected, though not on a word
by word basis; and allusions (illusions crafted by the Prince of
Darkness? No -- *a*llusions. oh.)
It is sometimes the case that fragments are classified by
convention, as they lack an appropriate comprehensive context.
The phrases seemed to have little effect upon the evil force
present (well, perhaps it was just an allusion to an evil force,
but present nonetheless, I assure you) and to ease his students'
worries, B*B instructed us about the proper interpretation of the
phrases.
Indeed, his discourse fell into the genre of the Commentary,
being a conscious inquiry into a given text. Examples of these
would be:
The Florilegium (Lat: bouquet, a flower-culling) which are
collections and excerpts of previously known literature. It was
this which was the first concrete evidence of a Judaic precedent
to the early Christian practice of Commentary writing. However,
many many more commentaries were discovered in time.
The 4QTestimonia, really a mishmash (Lat: farrago) of quotes.
and the 4QCatena (Lat: chain, fetter), a "chain" of quotes.
The Habbakkuk Commentary, discovered in Cave 1, was the first of
the Pesharim discoveries at Qumran, and is the best preserved
commentary. It aids us by giving us an idea of the continuity of
text.
Pesher> by the way, is not a euphemism for His Followers
from Beyond. It literally means "interpretation".
The genre of Commentary can be subdivided into Consecutive and
Selective (as with the Isaiah commentary) genres.
Commentaries are also formulaic: the word Pesher> is used
sometimes by itself, other times there are three or four ways in
which Pesher is used to introduce interpretation. 1)
"Interpretation of the Word", 2) "It is interpreted", 3) "This
interpretation concerns", 4) "Interpretation:"
It is conceivable that these formulaic statements may be
characteristic of particular commentators, although the evidence
is too fragmentary to decide yet. An example of this would be
the prevalence of "easy interpretations" in the commentary on
Nahum.
Before we can examine these texts, B*B said, we must determine
the intent of the author, and the closest method of determination
lies in the Commentary's explicit references, which can then be
tied into our historical knowledge.
And as he said this, Chthulu>, whose maw
is the font of orphan's tears; Chthulu> the Old One pent
on a throne of ice; Chthulu>, pulled out his copy
of Wimsatt and Beardsley's article "The Intentional Fallacy,"
hoping to dissuade B*B's students from the stance of a
determinable authorial intent.
Unfazed, for it is rumored that the blood of the Elder Ones flows
in his veins, B*B informed us that there is a newsline from
Arizona that the 18 scroll fragments to be analyzed there with
C14 dating have been so analyzed, and that the Habbakkuk
Commentary was written on leather from a goat which died from 150
to 105 BCE.
He then went on to point out various examples of allusions on
pages 198-9. The allusion to Absalom, for example.
And he drew out his ultimate weapon, that fiery brand which both
student and demonic-forces-from-Beyond fear -- the next
assignment:
18 April -- "para-biblical" materials (GM 219-237, 260-296)
With that, Chthulu>, his power spent,
withdrew into the abyss from whence he came.
THE END?
//end minutes dss.950413(2)//
DSS.950418(=#25) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 18 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
[[missing]]
//end minutes dss.950418//
DSS.950420(=#26) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 20 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorded by Chanan Tigay and Kathleen Hoffman
On the Book Reviews:
Dr. Kraft suggested a number of different headings available or
possible for our electronically published reviews including DSS
(as on Kim Noble's review), Delta Sigma Sigma (created by Glen
Aduana, for his review), DeltaCC (using the "lunate Sigma" form),
Dalet Samech Samech (phonetic Hebrew equivalent), and Mem Yud Mem
(abbreviated Hebrew translation). Choose what you want!
On DSS Halakha, in Preparation for Dr. Schiffman's Visit:
Dr. Kraft mentioned a few notable articles regarding the Halakhic
materials in the DSS including the recent BAR selection (20/6,
Nov/Dec 1994): "MMT as the Maltese Falcon," "Paul, Works of the
Law and MMT" (by Martin Abegg), "For This You Waited 35 Years"
(by Herschel Shanks); this led to comments on the computerized
concordance developed by Martin Abegg and Ben-Zion Wacholder
which was a catalyst to recent developments in opening up the
study of the DSS. A concordance lists each word in a particular
text or group of texts (e.g. the Bible) and shows every
occurrence of that word in the entire text, usually with some
surrounding context. Thus it is possible to reconstruct the full
text from the contextual snippets.
Dr. Kraft then commented on the legal battles between Shanks and
Elisha Qimron regarding the publication of the 4QMMT material.
Shanks published a "bootlet" copy of this text and Qimron sued
and won the legal rights to the text in an Israeli court. An
appeal (or counter suit) may be in the offing. In passing, Kraft
referred to Shanks as the Howard Cosell of biblical studies,
since both have legal backgrounds, are flamboyant and claim to
"tell it like it is."
The text of the official publication with the reconstruction of
4QMMT by Qimron and John Strugnell was excerpted in a useful
format in BAR and Dr. Kraft read it aloud to the class. The first
quarter of a page doesn't appear in the "composite text" in
Garcia-Martinez (77-79; but see 4Q394 on 79-81)); it deals with
calendric themes and reads as follows (see BAR):
[The sixteenth day of the second month is a sabbath]. The twenty-
third of it is a sabbath. The thirtieth [of it is a sabbath. The
seventh of the third month is a sabbath. The fourteenth of it is
a sabbath. The fifteenth of it is the Festival of Weeks. The
twenty-fi]rst of it is a sabbath. The twenty-eighth of it is a
sabbath. After it, the first and the second, [a third is to be
added. And the season terminates -- ninety-one days. The first of
the fourth month is a remembrance [i.e. a Memorial Day]. The
fourth] of it [is a sabbath]. The el[eventh] of it is a sabbath.
The eighteenth of it is a sabbath. The twenty-fifth of it is a
sabbath. The second of the fif[th is a sabbath. The third of it
is the Festival of New Wine.... The ninth of it is a sabbath].
The sixteenth of it is a sabbath. The twenty-third of it is a
sabbath. The thirtieth [of it is a sabbath....] The twenty-second
of it (the sixth month) is the Festival of New Oil, on the day
af[ter the sab]bath. Af[ter it] is [the Wood] Offer[ing.... And
the year is complete -- three hundred and [sixty-four] days.
As we have noted in other connections, each month is 30 days
long. Every three months one day is added. The wood offering is
mentioned in MMT but it is uncertain on which day it is to be
observed because the document is very fragmentary.
In Garcia-Martinez line 5 of 4QMMT/4Q394 is translated: "The
precepts we [are examining...]" Qimron-Strugnell reconstruct the
same line as "the precepts (of the Torah) in accordance with [our
opinion....]" Dr. Kraft believes that this sort of assumption
(i.e. that the precepts referred to those in the Torah) can be
quite misleading. The respective translations differ in a number
of other instances as well. In GM line eight the word "temple" is
found where Q-S have "sanctuary." In GM line twelve Q-S
translate: "...like (a woman) who whored with him," while GM has:
"[...] which he is pulling towards it." The word "pulling"
apparently can be a sexual reference. In GM line 96 Q-S have "the
book (of Moses)" while GM has simply "the book." Dr. Kraft
disagrees with the Q-S rendering since it prejudices the
discussion of what authoritative texts were used among those
represented in this document.
The language of MMT is temple and sacrificial language. However,
while some DSS texts speak without comment or footnote about
temple sacrifices others do footnote and comment (e.g. equating
sacrifice with prayer). Why this apparent discrepancy? Perhaps
because the texts are so fragmentary, leaving us with an
incomplete version of the original text, making the author's
intentions difficult to judge.
In line eleven we have "V'al," translated as "And concerning."
This is similar to the phrase "V'af al," translated as "And also
concerning." These seem to be formulas to introduce new subjects;
they may indicate formal divisions in the text.
In line 21, the text, itself written on animal hides, discusses
some use of leather and the tanning of hides. The text, however,
is too fragmentary to understand fully what this discussion
actually means.
Among the rites and rituals of the DSS community there is a high
consciousness about not mixing that which should not be mixed
(i.e. purity involves isolating items, people, etc.). Some things
which create impurity are: menstruation, masturbation, nocturnal
emissions, and dead bodies.
Line 96 seems to begin an eschatological section of the document
and offers an eschatological framework for the remaining
discussion. The text refers specifically to Belial (GM line 115)
and the end of time. Line 99f resembles the "blessings and
curses" section in Deutoronomy 27. Line 105 mentions Zedekiah,
the last legitimate ruling king in the Davidic Dynasty. The
author is clearly situating himself within the line of David.
At the end of the document the author is essentially saying to
the person addressed in the letter: "I've got it right. You're
wrong. You'd better change or else...." The person to whom the
author speaks in this text seems to have some sort of leadership
role.
//end minutes dss.950420//
DSS.950425(=#27) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 25 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorded by Mark P. Berman, with Asaf Cohen
1. Poetic Texts
Before diving into this material one must realize that any
grouping such as this is not set in stone. As Garcia Martinez
explains in the introduction to this section (p. 302), works can
be grouped in different ways. Some documents from the Dead Sea
Scrolls contain a variety of literary styles and thus it is hard
to classify them as psalms or liturgies or whatever. The DSS
scribes also sometimes pieced shorter documents together into a
longer work, and thus one may not be able simply to classify a
documents as a homogeneous unit if in fact it contains a
collection of disparate works. A good example of this is the
psalms. The Hebrew biblical book of Psalms contains 150 poems of
various sorts. The Greek translation has 151. The Qumran archives
include a Hebrew form of the Greek Psalm 151 and offer additional
psalms and also sometimes present the biblical psalms in a
different order from what has become traditional.
A. Apocryphal Psalms
Page 309, Column 27.
Here we have a non-poetic intrusion into its surrounding poetic
context. Although the DSS do not normally present poetry in
separate lines (as GM prints it, unless it is very fragmentary),
it is usually relatively easy to identify Hebrew poetry due to
its characteristic "parallelism" (repetition of ideas in adjacent
poetic "lines"). This prose passage discusses David and his
poetic works. David is described here as wise, learned,
knowledgeable, and perfect before God, inspired by the spirit of
prophecy. He is said to have written 3600 "psalms," which are
distinguished from 364 liturgical "songs" (one for each day of
the DSS solar year), and 52 other songs (one for each week), and
30 other songs for special occasions of various sorts, and yet 4
more songs "to be sung over the possessed" (for exorcisms?),
making a grand total of 4,050! The reference to David's "perfect"
ways must imagine a time either before the Bat-Sheva (Bathsheba)
incident, or after David had repented for that incident. (David
had sex with a woman named Bat-Sheva, and when she became
pregnant, David tried to cover his sin and finally sent her
husband off to die in battle -- see 2 Samuel 11.)
P. 310: column 28 (Psalm 151)
This psalm was not canonized in the Hebrew biblical collection,
and thus is absent from traditional Protestant Bibles. However,
it was included in the Greek and Latin collections, and thus is
in the Roman Catholic Bible. This and other psalms that are not
found in the Hebrew Bible bring up the question of the exact
relationship of the DSS community to the pslams and to the
traditional Hebrew biblical canon. Some psalms appear to have
sectarian characteristics (e.g. GM 304 col. 10) and thus could
have been written by the DSS community.
In passing, it was noted that the practice of collecting pslams
in antiquity was not limited to the biblical collection(s) or the
DSS Hymns. A collection of "Odes" drawn from other hymnic
material found in both the Christian Testaments became part of
the Greek Christian scriptures, alongside the book of Psalms.
This includes an Ode from the book of Habakkuk and the Nativity
Hymns of Mary and Elizabeth, among others.
2. Wisdom Literature
Much of the ancient Jewish poetic material such as the acrostic
hymn found also in Ben Sira 51.13-19 (GM 306, col. 21) is called
wisdom literature. Wisdom in Hebrew is "hokma," in Greek it is
"sophia," and in Latin it is "sapientia." Thus when one
encounters these words in a title (as in GM 380ff), one will be
able to tell that it is considered a "wisdom" poem.
Wisdom is personified as a female in many of the works. Thus one
must not be confused when sudden switches to female pronouns are
found, as in GM 305, col. 18.12ff, or GM 395, frg. 2.2.2f.
Personified wisdom is a key being next to God in the creation and
manintenance of the world (see especially Proverbs 8.22-31).
Page 379, Wiles of the Wicked Woman (4Q184), offers a good
example of "extra biblical" wisdom literature, reflecting themes
similar to those in the biblical book of Proverbs and also in the
"apocryphal" book of Sirach (Ben Sira). In line three the
seductive woman is noted for having eyes defiled with evil which
might mean that she wears eye make-up. This is a symbol of evil
and sin because it was learned from the fallen angels who appear
in the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36). The pit too is a
symbol of death. In class, only the first five sentences were
read to get the general idea that she (as the opposite of the
Wise Woman, Wisdom!) was to be avoided.
GM 383, Sapential Work A (4Q416), might be called "The Mystery of
Existence" for its emphasis on that sort of terminlogy. The
mystery of existance is a theme used here to glue together the
many teachings which discuss aspects of life and how to cope with
them. This also contains the concept of the "just man," which in
the DSS (as in other early Jewish and Christian literature) can
refer to someone who is just a good man, or it can refer to a
special person, perhaps a Messiah, or a Righteous Teacher. On
page 384, frg. 2.2.6, the phrase "do not embitter your
holy spirit" appears. This is an example of the many ideas
about spirits (of humans, of God, of Belial) offered in these
works; in the "horoscope" texts, people are described in terms
of the proportion of appropriate "spirit" they possess (GM 456).
The poetic DSS also contain allusions to economic matters or
terminology, such as poverty, riches, and inheritance. In such a
phrase as "you are poor," the reference could either be to the
collective community ("the Poor"), or to an individual.
Nonetheless, the author states that one who is poor must live
with that condition. Part of the mystery of existence is that
whatever one's lot is has been established by God and should not
(cannot?) keep a person from what God provides.
//end minutes dss.950425//
DSS.950427(=#28) Minutes, Dead Sea Scrolls Class, 27 April 1995
University of Pennsylvania, Religious Studies 225, Robert Kraft
Recorded by Vincent Liu, checked by Arthur Cho.
##General (Burning) Questions about the DSS##
**In what directions is DSS research going today?
Schiffman, who recently spoke to our class, is overplaying a
position by reading the DSS primarily through the eyes of
classical Judaism. Because the DSS people broke off from the
stream that produced the ancestors of classical Judaism, and
because this rift apparently led to a dead-end in Judaism (or at
best to the Karaites), it is difficult to do justice to the DSS
evidence in terms of mainstream Judaism alone. An example of
this is the identification of the DSS community as the Sadducees,
about whom we know so little. Identifying "Sadducees" at the
roots of the DSS community does not necessarily produce an
understanding of the Sadducees presented to us by Josephus or the
classical Jewish sources, and vice versa, since the respective
"Sadducee" movements have not necessarily developed in the same
ways since the "split." The DSS Zadokites appear to be
preoccupied with eschatological, messianic, predestinarian
perspectives that find no eleucidation in the more traditional
sources of information about Sadducees. Thus they can
legitimately be "reclaimed" for Jewish history, but part of the
response to that move will be a similar reclaiming of early
"Christianity" for Jewish history, which will deepen the
appreciation for the complexity of "Judaism" in this period, and
for the relevance of the DSS for understanding Christian origins.
As Arthur Darby Nock, that renown student of the hellenistic
world, liked to say, scholarship is like a drunken person
progressing down an alleyway, lurching from side to side. The
early emphasis on Christian reflections in the DSS is now being
countered with more classicly Jewish understandings. This will
probably produce another opposite lurch, in a progressively
narrowing alleyway.
**What are the "Christian" connections?
The DSS attest attitudes, expressions, approaches, and even
practices that throw light both indirectly and sometimes even
directly on the early development of the Jewish "Jesus
movements," and this evidence is extremely important both for
what Judaism was and became, and for how Christianity came about
and developed. In many ways, the "reclaiming" of the DSS for
understanding early Judaism goes hand in hand with reclaiming
earliest Christianity for that purpose as well.
**What is the most important next step in DSS research?
A step that has not yet been completed is the mechanical piecing
together and comparing of all of the various fragments to
determine which are physically related and unrelated.
Eventually, the fragments and documents will all be cross
referenced and disparities in different copies will be noted and
studied. Another step is to continue to study the various genres
of material, such as the exegetical or the parabiblical or the
poetic, and decide where the various types and styles belong in
relation to other known documents. Areas of investigation would
include literary studies of poetic structure, and studies of
repetitive terminology embedded in these Jewish writings.
**Who wrote the documents? Are they related to Qumran/Essenes?
This question still remains and will not be resolved until we
find or convincingly create more evidence. The assorted
documents from the Qumran DSS discoveries are not transparently
homogenous. If we only had documents from cave 1 we might be
able to find more homogeneity in the documents, but with the
numbers of fragments found elsewhere, especially in cave 4, the
lines become extremely blurred. The most important step in
answering this question is to begin by developing a system of
careful definitions and controls, and deciding which pieces of
evidence can be used as firm foundations. For example, if we
could agree to trust the Carbon-14 dating of the various
documents (not to mention whatever DNA tests develop), this would
provide a starting point around which we could begin to assess
the relationships between documents. Another question is how
much we can trust our basic ancient secondary sources, like
Josephus, since we don't know how his biases or the biases of his
sources may have influenced his writing about various groups. If
one were to follow Schiffman's reconstruction, for example, it
would be important to find an explanation for how these Sadducees
who care so much about Halakha could also become embroiled in
apocalyptic and eschatological concerns, despite the claims of
some of the ancient secondary witnesses about "the Sadducees."
**Who wrote the Damascus Document?
The time it seems to have been written is probably too early for
the supposed emergence onto the historical scene of the Essenes,
Pharisees, and Sadducees, according to Josephus. It is tempting,
however, to link it with the ancient Jewish "Hasidim" (meaning
those loyal to the covenant; pious ones) who are said to have
been among the first to become restless and confrontational with
respect to the threat of "hellenization" in the prelude to the
Maccabean/Hasmonean rebellion. The writers of the document
identify themselves as the sons of Zadok, although it is
possible, and even probable, that at least some of their
opponents also identified themselves similarly -- tensions within
the priestly house of Zadok may well be indicated. The authors
of the document may well have been the founders of what modern
scholars so simplistically style "the Qumran community," or the
document may have been written by some other early group, now
otherwise lost to us, but later it served to rally dissidents
who eventually developed into the people who collected and
deposited the DSS in the Qumran caves.
**Who are the Kittim?
It seems probable that "Kittim" is not used to refer to a
specific group that is always the same, in historico-political
terms, but has been generated by scriptural usages for the main
enemy at any given time (see, e.g. Numbers 24.24, Daniel 11.30, 1
Maccabees 1.1). For example, during the Maccabean rebellion the
Kittim might have been the Greek Seleucids, while during the
later first century bce and onward, it probably referred to the
Romans.
##Oddities in the DSS## (specifically in the Astronomical Texts,
Calenders, and Horiscopes):
**Coded -- Backwards, and mixed up writing.
In the description on GM 444, it is noted that some fragments are
"copied in code." Not only is the writing in 4Q186 (GM456)
backwards but it also contains various letters of different
alphabets mixed together.
**Magical -- Brontologion (GM 452, frg. 2, 2.6).
Brontos means thunder. This is a genre of literature (in Latin
and Greek) that predicts the future (especially political)
through clues of nature, specifically by the timing between
thunder. It was commonly used in the Greco-Roman world. It is
suprising to some interpreters to find "magic" (astrology)
throughout various Jewish documents, since in classical Judaism
it apparently was considered bad and evil and similar activities
are discouraged in certain scriptural passages (e.g. Deuteronomy
18.10ff). Interestingly, Zodiac signs have been found on the
floors of early Jewish synagogues in Palestine labelled in Greek
or with the names transliterated (even translated) into Hebrew.
For classical Judaism, this type of overt activity seems to have
been both forbidden and condemned. Still, there exist many
"magical" processes that have been incorporated even into
classical Judaism (as with most religions), such as mechanical
devices intended to influence the spiritual world.
**Funny Math? -- Sabbaths.
On GM 422 (line 30), reference is made to the song of the
sacrifice of "the seventh sabbath of the seventeenth of the
month." If one were to chart all of the sabbaths in the
predictable DSS 364 day solar calender (as, e.g. 4Q327 = GM 455),
the seventh sabbath would fall on the sixteenth day of the second
month, not the seventeenth. Note that on GM 425, frg. 3, the
sixteenth of the month is given, although the first part of the
word "sixteenth" is contained in brackets meaning that GM wasn't
completely sure that this was the correct reading. Whether or
not this is a problem (on GM 422) that arose during translation
or transcription is not clear. It might be a typo.
**Long lists of numbers and odd names --
In some places the naming system associated with certain periods
in the months is rather different from what is expected based on
the other DSS: for example the fragments on GM 452ff (see also GM
27ff, in one of the 4Q Rule fragments). As VanderKam notes
(114f), these refer to the 24 priestly shifts or watches (see
1 Chronicles 24.7-18), which are charted in terms of the more
normal sequences of sabbaths and months. Sometimes the lunar
calculations are also included, alongside the solar.
**The beginning of festivals -- sunset, sunrise, or midnight.
There is evidence that the festivals mentioned in the DSS
documents began at sundown, such as GM 41 = DD 10.15.
Discovering when the festivals commenced in the DSS community
could aid in placing them in a specific time period and with
particular associations in the evolution of Judaism (see
Schiffman's arguments regarding Sadducean halakha in 4QMMT).
**Titles on the inside and outside of rolled up documents --
The document found on GM 414-417 (4Q504) is of special interest
because it contains a "title" written on the reverse of fragment
8 (presumably the final portion), implying that when the scroll
was rolled up, one could identify the document from the outside,
without having to unroll it. Whether it also had a title on the
reverse of the starting column is not known, or whether the text
began with a title such as the one preserved at the end.
**ShirShabb -- (pg. 420, frag. 4)
As with parts of Ben Sira, the "Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice"
materials are found at both Qumran and Masada. This is
especially interesting because this document includes some
belligerent language.
**Debir -- GM 423, etc.
What is it?
**Angelization -- GM 433 = 1Q28\b 4.24ff and 5.20ff
This may be an example of a leader of the community being
"divinized" by the community. This presents a potentially
interesting precursor to the common practice of raising leaders
to "sainthood" in classical Christianity, and the "power"
language even has some resemblance the depiction of Christ in
Revelation 1.
**Melki-resha -- (GM 434 = 4Q280, line 3).
This literally is the opposite of Melchi-zedek (see GM 139 =
11Q13), and means "king of evil."
**Body Parts -- (GM 437 = 4Q436, line 5).
"You sharpen my kidneys so that I do not forget your laws." This
"psychological/physiological" idiom was found in another place
earlier and provides our Dead Sea Scrolls class with a sense of
closure for the year!
//end minutes dss.950427//